hi^./r  o.  i^  ^/  J  'Let 


cy  I 


Kit  "i-^' 


^d^i  czyfc.  Q^xaJL 


GOSPEL  HISTORY. 


A    SYLLABUS 


Professor  C.  W.  Hodge's  Gospel  History. 


I'KIXTED — XOT    PrBLISHEU — EXl'l.lSI VEI,Y 
KOlt    THF.    rSK    OK    STT'DEXTS    OF    THE 


iMlDDLh:  CLASS  IN  PRINCETON  SEMINARY. 


[Prepared  by  the  Class  of  '7' 


PRLSCETON: 

CHAULES    S.     KOBIN'SOX.    rillNTEK. 

1    S   7  9  . 


Eiitercil,  accdi'iliiig  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  yeiir  ISTH,  by 

C.  W.   HODGE, 
In  the  office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress,  at  Wasliington. 


PREFACE. 


This  volume  originated  in  the  desire  to  have  in  more  permanent  and 
satisfactory  form,  than  the  meager  pencil-scratches  of  any  ordinary  set  of 
notes,  the  substance  of  a  highly-valued  course  of  lectures.  And  it  is  but 
just  to  say  that  Professor  Hodge  is  responsible  for  nothing  here  printed, 
since  his  manuscript  was  not  consulted,  and  no  part  of  the  work  was 
supervised  by  him.  It  may  also  be  added  that  this  Syllabus  is  not 
intended  to  be  well  understood  except  in  connection  with  the  full  Lectures 
in  the  class-room,  and  also  in  connection  with  Robinson's  Harmony  and 
the  small  syllabus. 

The  preparation  of  these  notes  has  been  a  very  laljorious  task,  so  much 
so  that  the  editors  have  no  expectation  that  their  labor  and  pains  will  be 
adequately  appreciated.  But  before  any  one  indulges  in  wholesale  criti- 
cism, let  him  ^ra^  sit  down  and  prepare,  from  the  various  sources,  the 
manuscript  for  only  five  of  these  printed  pages,  taking  special  pains  to 
look  up  the  different  authorities  and  hunt  down  the  various  references. 
Then  let  him  remember  that  all  this  work  had  to  be  done  in  addition  to 
the  regular,  and  in  some  cases  the  extra,  duties  of  the  Seminary  coarse. 
To  any  student  who  will  comply  with  these  two  conditions,  the  editors 
herewith  give  full  p('rmi.«sion  to  cut  and  slash  to  his  heart's  content. 

ABBRKVIATIOXS. 

Alf.  for     Alfred.  Rob.  for     Robinson. 

Ell.  "       EUicott.  San.  "      Sanhedrim. 

Gal.  "      Galilee.  Syn.,  Syns.  '•      Synoptists. 

Jems.  "      Jerusalem.  Tisch.  "      Tischendorf. 

Lich.  "      Lichtenstein.  Wies.  "      Wieseler. 

The  other  abbreviations  will  l)e  re.'idily  understood  by  the  reader. 


Birth 

Circumcision  on  8th  Day 

Adoration  of  Magi — i;?th  Day 

Flight  uito  Egypt. 
Presentation  in  Temple 
Return  to  Nazareth. 

AS   MODIFIED. 

Birth 

('ircumcision  on  8th  day 

Adoration  of  Magi — 18th  Day. 
Presentation  in  Temple — 40th  Day 

Flight  into  Egypt. 
Return  to  Nazareth 

COMMON  VIEW. 

Birth 

Circumcision  on  8th  Day 

Presentation — 40th  Day 

Adoration  of  Magi  \ 
Flight  into  Egypt  J 

Return  to  Nazareth 

WORDSWORTH. 

Birth 

Circumcision 

Presentation 

Return  to  Nazareth. — Luke. 

Visit  to  Bethlehem  to  Feast 

Adoration  of  Magi 

Flight  into  Egypt 

Return  to  Nazareth.     Matthew's. 


EARLY  JUD^AN  MINISTRY. 


The  devil  leaveth  him.,  Matt.  4.11. 
Mark  1:13. 
Luke  4:13. 


Commissioners  from  .Jerusalem  ) 

to  John.  > 

Testimony  of  John  to  Jesus.    ; 

-Tesus  gains  disciples 

Goes  to  Galilee.    Miracle  in  Cana. 
First  Passover.    Traders  driven  > 
from  temple.  ) 

Discourse  with  Nicodemus.  .    . 
Teaches  and  Baptizes  in  Tudea.  ) 
Testimony  of  John.  j 

On  way  to  Galilee  discourses     i 
with  woman  of  Samaria.       > 
Arrives  in  Galilee.  S 


§18 

§19 

§20 

§21 

§22 
§23 

§24 

§25 


Jesus  departs  into  Galilee. 


Matt.  4:12 
Mark  1:14 
Luke  4:14 


LANGE,   GESS, 
FARRAR. 


BAPTISM  AND   TEMPTATION. 

EARLY  JUD^AN  MINISTRY. 


Tiseh.  and  EUicott 
Baptism  Dee.  780 


1st  Passover 


Journey  thro'  Sam'a  Tiseh.  and  Ellieott 


,EM. 


GALILEAN  MINISTRY. 

S 


Purim 


2d  Passover 


S 
o 

LAST  JOURNEYS  TO  JERUSALEM. 
Tabernacles 


John  5 

782 


Dedieation 


"*  i         3d  Passover 


nOBINSON,  ORESWELL. 

I'TIHM   ANI>  TBMPTATION,    DEr.    77 

KAHi.y  .iui)/i:an  ministry. 


)«a  Jolin  2, » 


OAMI.KAN  MINISTiiV, 


1  PAHBOVor        781  John 


ST  JOIIRNEYS  TO  .lEHUSALEM. 


'rabcrnnolOK  Joliii  7 

Dedlohtion         Jolin  10, 22 


4tli  PnMovsr      1783  John 


ANDREWS. 
n,VPTrBM  AND  TEMPTATION,   78". 
EARLY  .UTD.KAN  MINISTKV. 

JJoumey  thro'  Sam'n  Def. 

E 

'  2d  Pnssovor  "HI 

CIALII.EAN  MINISTRY. 


I,AST  .lOURNEY'S  TO  JERUSALEM. 

'rnhprn»rle« 

f,\  Dcdlontion 

E 

"I        41h   P«.«i.ovor        ITKI 


LICHTENSTEIN. 

AND   TEMPTATION,    DEC.    779. 

EARLY  JUDvEAN  JIINISTRV. 
1st  PaR.over         Itsii 

Journey  thro'  Snm'a 


Tflbeinacles         |781  John  .-. 


GALILEAN  MINISTRY. 


LAST  .TOURNEYS  TO  JERURALEM. 


WIESELER,   ECLICOTT, 
TISCIIENDORF. 


IIAPTISM   AND   TEMPTATION,    .-iUMMEU,   78(1. 

EARLY  .lUD.EAN  MINISTRY. 


ney  thro'  Snm'n  Tl«oh.  and  Klllooi 
John  4,  Mt. 

Ptirlm  John  ; 


LAST  .lOURNEYS  TO  .lEKUSALEM. 


LANOE,  GESS, 
PARRAU. 


BAPTISM  AND  TEMPTATION. 

EARl.Y  .TUD.EAN  MINISTRY. 


Journey  thro'  finin'o 


OALILEAN  MINISTRY. 


LAST  .lOUUNKYS  TO  .JERUSALEM. 

'    Tahornnolea 

*i|   ■      Dedication 

"*  [        3d  Pasflovor        783 


II 


o 


r.  -e-;      « 


Pp- 


.S   '-^    fe 


.Si    1^    E^ 


!-    -Ih'    o   r_ 


.=«   iJ 


CJ      «     OS 

00     OS     Oi 


-^    ::     ::     - 


EASTERN  GALILEE. 


§28  Annunciation. 
I.    §39  Organization. 
II.  §§29-34  Miracles. 

III.  §§34-38  Opposition. 

IV.  §41  Teaching. 


I.     §40  Organization. 
II.  §§42-43  Miracles. 

III.  §§44-50  Opposition. 

IV.  §§54-55  Teaching. 


Second  Circuit. 


One  Day. 


One  Day  . 


One  Day. 


Third  Circuit. 


f  §43  Raising  of  widow's  son  at  Nain. 

I  §44  Jolin  the  Baptist  sends  disciples. 

\  §45  Upbraids  the  cities. 

I  §4()  Anointing  by  a  woman. 

t  §47  Second  circuit  through  Galilee. 

f    §48  Healing   of    dumb  demoniac.      People   cry 
"Son  of  David."    Scribes  and  Pharisees 
blaspheme. 
§49  Pharisees  seek  a  sign. 
I    §50  Mother  and  brethren  interfere. 
I  §§54-55  Parables. 
L   §56  Cross  the  lake.     Tempest  stilled. 

.    §57  Demoniacs  of  Gadara. 

§58  Levi's  feast. 

§59  .Jairus'  daughter  and  woman  with  issue. 

§60  Two  blind  men  and  dumb  demoniac. 

§61  Second  rejection  at  Nazareth. 

§62  3rd  circuit  in  Galilee.     Mission  of  twelve. 

§63  Death  of  John  the  Baptist. 

onA  ^  Return  of  the  twelve. 

^      (  Feeding  of  five  thousand. 

§65  Walking  on  sea. 

§66  Discourse  in  Synagogue  at  Capernaum. 


J.   1 


J||.s 


^  ill  ilfl 


■is  I. 


-  it  J  nPM  I  wtfllll  ijilJii  IrPisIl 
ii "  liliil  ®  lilltill  ^^itiilllll  fl 


.H2h 

lis 


^ 


J5 


Si 

as  J  tfl 

a  ac  ^ 
■■+3  ^  a 

:c  -in    3 

2      -J 


_r 

a 

O 

S" 

22 

r^ 

D 

O 

-4^ 

a 

•Ji 

a: 

CO 

^ 

rt 

1h 

K 

H 

Cm -3 


to    73 

1  = 


&3« 

13   ^   '^ 


&4 

a 


2.2.5 


S2     ^ 


o  .a 

sl 

o  1h 

^ 

^ 

f—  a    • 

•  a  (D 

O    ^    rt 

5 

u.  ;;^  u 

S 

o^^ 

M 

1-1 

W 

^" 

P4 

« 

^ 

^ 

c  _o 

OQ 

'E 

<1 

«    • 

W 

^Sc; 

P3 
<1 

S 

t-l    ^   ^ 

-^^ 


o 


OS'S      . 

t-    ^    Oi 

fccoj  a 

C    «    41 
o        ^"^ 

a  iti.a 

a  y3   as 

O  bog 
®*  .2  "o 


5  tre€ 
Par, 
Dis 

Pass. 

hany. 
udas. 

iH  p  _« 

^^1- 

T*   as         _. 

1  S"!- 

^  ?i  4J  a 
^  5  f«  S 

i:.2  2 

■A 

a 

ICr-TS 

^.2^^" 

**  3  a 

o 

O     tH    ■'-' 

li   ffJ   rt 

« 

^Ph 

bCbC-C   « 

a  -j=  a  '-3 


ax;  a 
%%%% 

re     CCCU     M 

t-    S    4>   d    o 

^  2  2  52  •- 


-f?  ?  '^  o 


>i  as 


-  a; 

a 

CO   ^co 


^       CO 

-u.  i:  »  o 


Ph 


o 
w 


P. 
a 

CO 


cs  a 

e  ail 


C) 


•6mbs     -oi  -uns    "II  -uoj^     'z:! -sanx       -fl  -p^AY  '"^sij^ t'l    sanqx    'ffl  'PHJ 


CO  >j 

^    I 

CO   goj. 


1    "S 

o      (^^ 


O' 


P< 

P< 

a 

CO 


tfl 


O 


0H 


PLh 

09 


> 

H 


Oh 

o 

0! 

o 

;§ 

£ 

a; 

o 

JC 

K 


3E- 


X  o 


i) 


OJ 


I-H 

CO 

->** 

00 

■^ 

0 

t-^ 

H- * 

I-H 

pH 

-I-H 

CJ 

(N 

> 

fO 

iO 

ci             "H 

10 

M 

"^ 

^~' 

0 

'rj 

fl 

X> 

o 

E 

>-» 

-s 

■3 

c 

u 

Q 

3 

CO 

C8 

-4-3 

ation 

w    An 
alphas 

P 

<1 
O 

_co 

03 

c 
£ 

S3 

OO 

09 

03 

H 

£ 

dn 

pii 

.^. 

Ph 

09 
Hi 

H 
&4 


P4 


>^ 


c3 


o3 

t 

Q 


pq 


pL. 


0 

i 


10 

WESTCOTT'S  APPROXIMATION. 

1:00  a.  m.     The  Agony. 

Betrayal. 

Conveyance  to  the  High-Priest's  house,  probably  ad- 
joining "The  Booths  of  Hanan." 
2:00  a.  ni.     The  preliminary  examination  before  Annas  in  the  presence 

of  Caiaphas. 
3:00  a.  ni.     The  examination  before  Caiaphas  and  the  Sanhedrin  at  an 

irregular  meeting  at  "the  Booths." 
5:00  a.  m.     The  formal  sentence  of  the  Sanhedrin   in  their  own  proper 
place  of  meeting,  Gazith  or  Beth  Midrasli. 
First  examination  before  Pilate  at  the  Palace. 
5:30  a.  m.     The  examination  before  Herod.      Scourging  and  first  mock- 
ery by  the  soldiers  at  the  Palace. 
The  sentence  of  Pilate  John  xix:14. 
The  second  mockery  by  soldiers. 
The    crucifixion    and    rejection    of    stupefying    draught. 

Mark  xv:25. 
The  last  charge. 
The  darkness. 
The  end. 


6:30  a. 

m. 

7:00  a. 

m. 

9:00  a. 

m. 

12:00 

m. 

12—3  p. 

m. 

3:00  p. 

m. 

11 


A        =' 


ci   ^  ii -^ 

■^^^  c 
«  o  ^^  -^^ 

s  o  -"  5 

^  to  t,   -^ 

*-•   >^  S   ^- 

c  ^  £;  o 


^    L.    X 


t£        fe 


'5      2  i  rt 

rt-l    --■    .--i 


V.     H  2  2 


a 


g 
o 
O 


4  !«► 

o  o  o 

»C  !S  L- 


1-^S 


c5 
O 

H 

CO 

oi 


S  to 
is  « 


>.::3  >  rt  rt 
c3   ^   p    !2   5 

4)      r  53  ^ 


S     t,     7! 


T        S   ?•   t*^  hr  r^ 


2m 


— ^  —  *^  jj 


^      42 


rt  2 

Si 


o  o  aj 

-•>     TO  ^ 


Ml    C 

th  ci  CO 


.s  -O  -kJ  o 

^    jO    O)  ^ 

y:  rt  rt  - 

r—   :/:   IB  o) 


.  C  ^ 

!^     >     >^ 

§2  J^ 


CP 


H<1 


C3,    QJ    r— I 

i-s 


=:     -^ 


» 


4)    (U_^ 


S  a  oj 

"S    4>    !-<  OJ 

t«  3  2     •= 
"  o    • 


-iJ  -u  r3 

cc   as   S 

.-r  a  =s 
«  c  o  -i 

o  >2^  a 

ic  o  ^  s 


a  «^ 

®   ^S   cS 


<B  a 


-■2  if -3, 
03  a  p. 


r!  ^  ^  ra  +j 


CQ  OT  -*      »c 


►-5.2 
.  0.2S 

>^2  a 
-t^  a  a 

0  ^  S 

5  S  8 

QJ    » 
HH 


0 

tc 

g 

"~! 

0 

■-^ 

,a 

cc 

H 

6 

OJ 

t/3  '^ 

^2 

35 

s 

11 

© 

ffl 

a 

cc 

J 

t3 

0 

a 

t-y 

rt 

-c 

tc 

^ 

10 

c3 

a 

u 

0 

(0 

a 


05^  a.a' 
a  o  ■-  o 

2  O  OJ  c«  +^  ,, 

.a  •— '  ^  cj  1^  © 
a  a  "3?  a^  a 
•s  ci._^  a  tu  .a 

«  «  ^  a  ^  - 
'^  ^a  ^  cc  "j^ " 
r-'"^  aj  «  aj  :;3 
■^  a  ^  ^  a 
©  ■"  ^  &f)  .  aT 
:g  ^  2  a  bc^ 

^  tcj2  S  a  ff 


45  « 

Si 

s-  a 


T-i  (m'  aj  ^'  to  ffl  j>  00 


SYLLABUS  OF  GOSPEL  HISTORY. 


chro:nology. 

1.  Rationalists  attempt  to  overthrow  date  of  the  Gos- 
pels, on  external  grounds;  they  give  a  later  date. 

2.  Alleged  discrepancies  of  the  gospels  are  exagger- 
ated. Two  kinds  :  general,  in  which  a  difterent  character 
of  Christ  is  presented  ;  special,  one  gospel  being  supposed 
to  contradict  another.  If  we  can  trace  a  gradual  histori- 
cal growth  from  beginning  to  end,  we  have  in  this  unity 
of  the  gospels,  most  efiective  answer  to  opponents.  Birth- 
place of  Christ  is  beyond  question,  but  the  date  of  birth 
is  unknown.  It  is  assigned  to  753,  751,  750  (C.  W.  H.) 
749  (Rob.)  748  (Kepler)  747  (Ideler).  No  one  is  at  liberty 
to  dogmatize  where  there  is  so  much  diversity  of  opinion. 
Give  gospels  benefit  of  their  own  reticence.  It  does  not 
vitiate  their  historical  value.  The  Passion  is  variously 
assigned  between  781 — 790.  Positive  chronology  is  the 
particular  date.  Relative  chronology  is  the  relation  of 
events  to  one  another,  their  succession.  Absence  of 
chronological  precision  shows  it  was  not  essential  to  the 
plan  of  the  writer.  It  seldom  disturbs  the  order  ;  Matt, 
and  Mark  are  less  regular  than  Lk.  and  Jno.  The  year 
and  the  day  of  the  nativity  are  to  be  determined.  Pres- 
ent era  was  fixed  in  the  6th  century  by  Dionysius,  a 
Scythian  monk  who  flourished  in  Rome  553 — 556  A.  D. 
He  assumed  that  year  of  Ciirist's  birth  was  coincident 
with  IsiA.  If  750  be  the  correct  date,  our  era  begins  4 
years  too  late.  This  era  was  1st  used  in  historical  works 
by  Venerable  Bede,  early  in  the  8th  century,  afterward 
was  introduced  in  public  transactions  by  Frank  kings, 
Pepin   and   Charlemagne.     Gospels  give  4  data  :  "% 

(1.)  Tune  of  Herod  the  Great,  Matt.  2:1,  Lk.  1:5. 

(2.)  Census  in  Judea  under  Augustus,  Lk.  2  :  1. 

(3.)  Star  of  the  Magi,  Matt.  2. 

(4.)  Age  of  Christ  when  beginning  public  ministry, 
Lk  3  •  23 

Joseplius  (Ant.  17  :  8  :  1) :  "  Herod  died,  the  5th  day 
after  he  had  caused  Antipater  to  be  slain,  having  reigned, 


since  he  had  caused  Antigonus  to  be  slain,  34 years  ;  but 
since  he  had  been  decLared  king  by  the  Romans,  37." 
(Ant.  17:6:4):  "  Herod  deprived  Mattliias  of  the  high- 
priesthood,  and  burnt  the  other  Matthias,  who  had  raised 
the  sedition,  with  his  companions,  alive.  And  that  very 
night  there  was  an  eclipse  of  the  moon."  Now  Herod 
was  declared  king  in  714;  therefore  his  death  would  be 
from  1st  IsTisan  750  to  1st  Nisan  751,  ace.  to  Jewish  com- 
putation, at  age  of  70.  Astronomical  investigation  places 
this  eclipse  on  the  night  of  12th  and  13th  of  March  750. 
He  was  dead  before  the  5th  of  April,  because  the  Pass- 
over of  that  year  fell  on  12th  of  April,  and  Josephus 
(Ant.  17:  8  :  4)  states  that  before  this  feast,  his  son  and 
successor  Archelaus,  observed  the  usual  7  days'  mourn- 
ing for  the  dead.  His  death,  therefore,  must  be  placed 
between  13th  March  and  April  4th,  750.  (Andrews). 
How  long  before  Herod's  death  was  the  Lord  born  ? 
Matt,  and  Lk.  relate  events  that  occurred  between  his 
birth  and  Herod's  death  ;  circumcision,  presentation  in 
temple,  visit  of  Magi,  flight  into  Egypt,  murder  of  Inno- 
cents. Whatever  view  nuiy  be  taken  as  to  order  of  these 
events,  they  can  scarcely  have  occupied  less  than  two 
months.  This  would  bring  his  birth  into  Jan.  or  Feb,  at 
latest,  750. 

Luke  2:  1-2;  a  all  the  world  should  be  taxed. 

b  the  taxing  was  first  made  when  Cyre- 
nius  was  governor  of  Syria. 

OBJECTIONS    URGED. 

I.  Wo  such  universal  taxing  under  Augustus  on  record: 
the  censuses  of  contemporary  history  are  local ;  a  clear 
case  of  inaccuracy,  say  the  skeptics.  Ans.  :  It  is  known 
from  Suetonius  and  Ancyrian  monument,  tliat  Augustus 
three  times  instituted  a  census,  in  726,  746,  and  767. 
The  second  only  needs  to  be  considered.  It  ap[)ears  to 
have  been  a  census  civhini,  confined  to  cives  Bonirmi,  and 
not  to  have  extended  to  the  provinces  ;  cannot,  therefore, 
have  been  the  taxing  of  Lk.  Some  restrict  olxo'jinvrj  to 
Palestine  or  Syria.  It  would  be  improbable  and  un- 
natural for  Luke  to  make  this  restriction.  A  better  an- 
swer is,  that  if  Lk.  mentions  the  census,  that  is  enough. 
Other  answers :  1.  The  omission  of  contemporaries  has 
its  analogy;  an  argument  from  silence  is  never  conclusive. 


Various  laws  were  established,  of  which  we  are  informed 
by  no  liistorians,  but  by  monuments.  In  year  of  Cesar's 
death,  there  was  a  geographical  survey  of  Rome,  but  his- 
torians do  not  tell  us  of  it.  Ancient  historians  omit  to 
irive  a  complete  list  of  governors  of  the  provinces.  On 
this  period,  Suetonius  and  Tacitus  are  very  brief.  This 
argument  from  silence,  if  pushed,  would  compel  us  to 
believe  that  no  important  event  took  place  in  the  long 
reisi'n  of  Augustus,  of  which  the  few  historians  whose 
works  remain  have  not  made  specific  mention.  2.  Prob- 
ably the  censuses  referred  to  on  the  Ancyrian  marbles 
were  confined  to  Italy,  and  did  not  extend  to  the  Provin- 
ces. But  beyond  question,  the  census  did  at  times  ex- 
tend to  particular  [provinces.  3.  A  considerable  ^t)  oc- 
curs here  in  Dion  Cassius  (Roman  historian);  from  747 
to  757,  the  very  period  in  which  Lk.  says  the  taxing  was 
made.  4.  In  josephus  the  names  of  several  who  were 
governors  of  Syria  about  lime  of  Lord's  birth  are  men- 
tioned, but  only  incidentally,  nor  is  the  list  complete. 
Being  a  professed  Roman  flattei^r,  he  leaves  out  all  that 
miglvt  excite  the  discontent  of  Jewish  readers.  He  passes 
over  as  lightly  as  possible  whatever  testifies  to  degrada- 
tion of  his  people. 

A  posidre  argument  is  this  :  In  time  of  Augustus,  there 
was  strong  tendency  to  centralization,  and  establishment 
of  the  mifitary  power.  Tiberius  read  in  Senate  an  auto- 
graph MS.  letter  of  Augustus's,  which  showed  resources 
of  the  empire,  how  many  soldiers  could  be  raised  and 
how  much  money  thev  could  give.  How  did  he  know, 
unless  he  had  tried  "it?  The  citizens -of  Ancyra  had 
marble  copies  made  of  bJXLaze_tablets  in  which  he  re- 
corded the  chief  events  of  his  life.  IijJ±£Se.  he_4eclares. 
he  made  a  census  of  Roman  citizens  four  times;  shows 
that  He  was  doing  this  kind  of  work  and  confirms  Lk. 
indirectly.  Cassiodorus  says  that  a  careful  survey  was 
made  in  all  provinces  wherelioman  sovereignty  extended, 
that  there  were  enrolment  lists.  His  authority  of  itselt 
would  have  no  great  weight;  but  he  may  have  read 
many  works  unknown  to  us,  on  this  period.  Mommseu 
donbts  his  statement,  but  Zurapt  accepts  it.  "  Being  a 
Christian,  he  might  have  drawn  his  information  from 
Lk."  (Lauge).  Suidas:  "  Aiigustus  sent  out  twenty 
men  of  great  probity  into  all  parts  of  the  empire,  by 


whom  he  made  an  assessment  of  persons  and  estates  ^' 
has  no  intrinsic  improbability,  but  is  unsupported.  Sui- 
das,  like  Cassiodorus,  was  a  Cliristian. 

Indirect  Proofs. — 1.  Under  the  Republic,  each  prov- 
ince retained  its  own  mode  of  taking  census,  and  under 
the  Antonines,  there  was  a  regular  land  tax.  ,/ 

2.  Exemption  from  land  tax  in  Italy  (by  Jus  ItaUcum)^^> 
began  with  Augustus.     The  exception  proves  rule.     The  ^y 
land  and  poll  tax  under  Pompej-  must  have  been  in  full  ^ 
force,  which  presupposes  a  census.     Here  again  is  a  diffi- 
culty.    When  was  the  census  made  ? 

II.  Palestine  was  not  yet  a  Roman  province ;  a  Roman 
census  was  ordered  during  reign  of  Herod  Great.  But 
Herod  was  a  vex  socms,  who  had  to  pay  tribute  to  the 
Romans  :  and  then,  this  census  may  have  been  for  statis- 
tical and  military  purposes,  as  in  the  decennial  census  of 
U.  S.  Jews  were  first  compelled  to  pay  tribute  to  Rome 
in  time  of  Pompey.  From  time  of  Julius  Ceesar,  certain 
tributes  were  levied  in  Judea  for  Rome. 

III.  Cyrenius  was  Governor  of  Syria  for  10  years  after 
the  nativity,  and  made  a  registration  of  inhabitants,  Acts 
5 :  37.  The  trouble  is,  to  find  room  for  another  census 
in  Palestine  under  same  Cyrenius  and  at  time  of  Christ's 
birth.  Tholuck:  "This  enrolment  took  place  before 
{ixpcoz'/j)  Cyrenius  was  gov.  of  Syria:  Ttpwrvj  in  compara- 
tive sense  as  John  1  :  15.  This  solution  is  not  impossible 
grammatically.  The  taxing  in  question  was  1st,  as  dis- 
tinguished from  2d,  which  took  place  during  his  2d 
administration.  N"eander  takes  i^ys/wueuovTo::  in  wide 
sense  of"  leader;"  is  confirmed  by  Tacitus  who  says  this 
man  was  thus  employed.  Ebrard  :  o.Tiojpaip/)  means  reg- 
istration as  well  as  taxation.  aTtoypaf/j  has  a  double 
sense  :  (a)  transcription,  [b]  enrolment.  If  passage  be 
read,  this  was  1st  taxing,  in  distinction  from  2d,  and  took 
place  under  him  as  governor  of  Syria,  but  in  fact  he  was 
not  so  gov.  until  760,  we  must  construe  ^ys/ioueuouTo:;  as 
applicable  to  any  one  who  rules.  Thus  Cyrenius  may 
have  been  a  joint  or  assistant  ruler  as  Josephus  speaks  of 
Saturninus  and  Voluninius  as  Presidents  of  Syria  ;  or  an 
extraordinary  commissioner  sent  from  Rome  especially 
for  this  purpose.  In  all  this,  is  nothing  improbable;  it 
agrees  with  the  fact  that  about  that  time  he  was  in  East 
and  engaged  in  political  afiairs.     Wieseler  :  "  this  taxing 


Q^cy'i^b'V^-OL^U) 


^'=^'^>2/-~~^<^fc€^^--^^.,,i>:2Z:  'T^ 


^ 


U^.         .•n-^Kiv-.T.e^^V  ^u»~nxAj  VLx   lux^'f  S^^'^JL^   ^'^   2 -^'-■^•^^^  — --^-^ 


9 

was  before  Cyrenius  was  gov.  ofS."  Ziimpt,  in  Iiis  list 
of  Syrian  governors,  B.  C.  30  to  A.  D.  66,  thus  tills  the 
interval  from  748  to  758  : 

748—750  P.  Q.  Varus  or  6—4  B.  C. 

750 — 753  Quirinus  or  4—1  B.  C. 

753—757  M.  Lollins  or  1  B.  C.  to  3  A.  I). 

757—758  C.  M.  Censorinus  or  3—4  A.  I). 

758—760  L.  V.  Saturninus  or  4—6  A.  I). 

760 — 765     "  "  is  succeeded  by  Qidrinus 

(Cyrenius.) 

If  he  be  right,  Quirinus  was  twice  gov.  of  Syria.  His 
fact  is  that  because  (Mlicia,  when  separated  from  Cyprus, 
was  united  to  Syria,  Cyrenius  or  Quirinus,  as  gov.  of  the 
first  mentioned  province,  was  also  really  gov.  of  the  last 
mentioned,  whether  in  any  kind  of  association  with 
Saturninus,  or  otherwise,  can  hardly  be  ascertained,  and 
that  his  subsequent  more  special  connection  with  Syria 
led  his  earlier,  andapparentl}'  brief,  connection  to  be  thus 
accurately  noticed.  Varus  was  in  (office  at  least  till  the 
summer  of  750.  But  that  he  did  not  continue  as  gov. 
until  759  is  probable  from  the  fact  that  Augustus  ruled 
that  no  OJie  should  govern  a  province  more  than  live  years. 
A  coin  of  Antioch  proves  that  in  758  L.  V.  Saturninus 
was  gov.  of  Syria.  Zumpt's  list  shows  who  filled  this 
office  750—758,  Varus  till  B.  C.  4  or  750.  ^o  names 
are  given  till  Quirinus  A.  D.  6,  by  Josephus.  During 
interval  he  was  on  military  duty  near  Syria.  The  tri- 
umphal insignia  granted  him  prove  him  legate  and  in 
Syria.  This  taxing  began  a  little  before  he  became 
actual  legate.  As  he  had  been  proconsul  in  Africa,  and 
as  it  was  a  rule  that  the  same  person  should  not  be  ruler 
over  more  than  one  of  the  consular  or  praetorian  prov- 
inces under  care  of  Senate,  he  could  not  have  been  gov. 
of  any  of  the  provinces  adjacent,  Asia,  Pontus,  Bithynia, 
Galatia;  he  must  then  have  been  acting  as  gov.  of  Syria 
and  legate  of  emperor.  If  he  succeeded  Varus,  he  may 
have  completed  taxing  begun  before,  ace.  to  Lk.  Ter- 
tullian  says  the  census  at  the  birth  of  Christ  was  taken 
by  Lentius  Saturninus.  When  then  was  he  gov.  of  Syr- 
ia ?  Most  say  746—748  ;  consequently  the  birth  must  be 
placed  as  early  as  747.  Monmisen  adduces  a  marble 
recording  honors  to  man  who  had  been  twice  legate  in 
Syria.     Only  two  had  been,  L.  Saterninus  and  Quirinus. 


10 

Concerning  importance  of  tliis  investigation,  we  are  not 
bonud  to  establish  any  one  of  these  views  any  more  than 
Luke. 

Star  of  the  Magi. — Kepler  has  sliown  that  in  year 
747  a  three-fold  conjunction  of  Jupiter  and  Saturn  in  the 
sign  Pisces  occurred,  and  that  in  spring  of  following  year 
planet  Mars  likewise  appeared  in  this  constellation.  He 
regarded  it  as  probable  tliat  an  extraordinary  star  was 
conjoined  with  these  tliree  planets,  as  in  1603.  He 
thought  this  conjunction  formed  star  of  Magi.  Ideler 
rejects  the  new  star  of  Kepler,  and  looking  only  to  con- 
junction, puts  birth  747 — thinks  Christ  was  two  yrs.  old 
when  the  command  of  Herod  was  given.  If  this  be  true, 
the  year  would  be  748,  and  agree  with  Kepler's  conjunc- 
tion. Hence  the  star  had  been  seen  bj^  Magi  two  years 
before  their  arrival  at  Jerusalem.  Wieseler  argues  cor- 
rectly that  we  have  no  certain  gi'ound  for  believing  that 
star  of  Matt,  was  this  conjunction  of  planets.  He  men- 
tions tliat  the  Chinese  astronomical  tables  record  appear- 
ance of  a  new  star  at  a  time  which  coincides  with  the  4tb 
year  B.  C.  Precise  conclusions  are  not  to  be  drawn,  but 
confirmation  of  approximate  date  is  secured. 

Day  of  the  Nativity. — Up  to  the  4th  century,  6th  of 
Jaa.  had  been  observed  as  day  of  Lord's  baptism,  and  had 
been  regarded  as  day  of  his  birth,  from  Lk.  3  :  23,  the 
supposition  being  that  he  was  just  30  when  baptized.  In 
4th  centur}^,  under  influence  of  western  church,  this  was 
changed,  and  both  churches  observed  Dec.  25th.  This 
is  good  date,  because  it  gives  time  enough  for  the  records 
in  Matt,  to  transpire.  During  Dec,  Jan.,  Feb.  and  Mar., 
there  is  no  entire  cessation  of  rain  for  any  long  interval, 
yet  an  interregnum  of  several  weeks  of  dry  weather  gen- 
erally occurs  between  middle  of  Dec.  and  of  Feb.,  some- 
what distinguishing  the  former  rains  of  the  season  from 
the  latter.  Lightfoot:  "The  spring  coming  on,  they 
drove  the  beastsinto  wildernesses,  or  champaign  grounds, 
where  they  fed  them  the  whole  summer.  The  -winter 
coming  on,  they  betook  themselves  home  again  with  the 
flocks  and  herds."  The  climate  of  Bethlehem  is  not  un- 
like that  of  Jerus.,  though  milder.  Shepherds  could 
have  been  pasturing  their  flocks  in  Dec.  Barclay:  "in 
this  month  the  earth  is  full}'  clothed  with  rich  verdure, 
and   there    is  generally  an  interval  of  dry   weather  be- 


-^■N>' 


-^'".^ 


v^^ 


■s- 


^ 


r 


V 


11 


tu-eeii  middle  of  Dec.  and  Feb."  (Andrews,  32-35). 
Abia's  course  was  8th  in  the  24.  At  destruction  of  tern- 
pie  by  Titus  on  Auor.  5,  823,  the  1st  class  had  just  en-  Je^C^ 
tered  on  its  course.  Its  period  of  service  was  from  the 
evening  of  the  4th  of  Aug.,  which  was  the  Sabbath,  to 
the  evening  of  following  8abl)ath,  Aug.  11th.  We  can 
now  easily  compute  backward  and  ascertain  at  what  time 
in  any  given  year  each  class  was  officiating. 

Date  of  the  Crucifixion. — Lk.  23  :  54  ;  Mk.  15:  42:^ 
Mtt.  27:  62,     Tiapaaxz'jrj  was  comm.on  designation  of  6th 
day  of  flie  week.     The  iSabl)ath   occurring  on  2d  day  of 
the  feast,  the  1st  feast  day  became  the  preparation,  the 
day  before  the  Sabbath.     1.  That  7:ao«a/£!^y;  might  not  be 
apprehended  as  the  weekly  one,  referable  to  the  Sabbath,    i 
but  be  regarded  as  connected  with  the  feast  day  of  the    / 
Pass.,  Jno.   expressly  adds  zou  -day^ci  (19  :   14).     rzo.rto.a- 
xvjYj — Friday  in  the  passover  season,  or  paschal   week,  as 
a  day  of  preparation  for   the  Sabbath.     The  true  refer- 
ence is  to  tlie  paschal  feast,  coming  in  on  the  evening  of 
the  day,  of  which    feast  the  first  day  fell,  according  to! 
John,  upon  the  Sabbath. 

Day  of  Month. — Crucifixion  was  14th  or  loth  Nisan.  'Vl'.Ji^^^^ 
Was  the  last  meal  of  Christ  with  his  disciples,  the  regu- 
lar Passover  supper  or  did  it  anticipate  it?  Ans.  The 
paschal  iamb  was  usually  killed  14th  Nisan  and  eaten 
same  evening.  The  meal,  therefore,  was  on  preparation 
day,  Thursday,  "N^isaji  14th,  and  the  crucifixion  on  Fri- 
day, Nisan  15th.  (Mk.  14:  12;  Lk.  22:7).  According 
to  Synopts.,  the  supper  was  the  regular  Passover.  But 
John  calls  it  the  preparation  of  the  Passover  (19:  14); 
speaks  as  if  the  paschal  supper  was  legally  upon  the 
evening  of  Friday,  and  consequently-  the  Lord,  who  ate  it 
upon  the  evening  of  Thursday,  ate  it  before  the  time. 
4  apparently  discrepant  references:  1.  John  nowhere 
calls  it  the  Passover.  "  Out  of  J)  times  in  which  7i6.aya 
is  used  by  John,  in  6  it  is  applied  to  the  feast  generally, 
and  not  to"  paschal  supper  only.  The  meaning  in  the 
other  3  is  in  dispute."  (Andrews).  2.  Jno.  13:  1—"  Be- 
fore the  feast  of  the  passover."  Does  this  refer  to  the 
supper  of  verse  2  ?  Tubingen  critics  say  3'es.  Therefore 
it  must  have  been  a  supper  of  a  private  nature,  and  not 
the  Passover  meal  which  it  preceded  ;  and  according  to 
John,  Jesus  never  ate  the  Passover,  but  oidy  a  private 


^ 


12 

meal  beforehand.  Being  crucified  next  day,  it  must  liave 
been  on  Thursday,  thus  directl_y  contradicting  Synopts, 
who  make  it  I'all  on  Friday.  But  the  clause  does  not 
refer  to  the  supper  of  verse  2  ;  it  refers  to  what  immedi- 
ately follows,  "  that  Jesus  knew  that  his  hour  was  come." 
He  knew  it  beforehand. 

3.  Jno.  18  :  28 — They  themselves  went  not  in,  lest 
they  should  be  defiled  ;  that  they  might  eat  the  passover. 
Held  :  that  on  day  of  crucifixion,  Passover  was  not  yet 
eaten.  As  it  Avas  not  eaten  before  6  o'clock,  i.  e.  at  be- 
ginning of  next  day  (the  Jews'  day  commenced  at  even- 
ing) the  defilement  incurred  in  the  morning  would  have 
ceased  before  the  regular  Passover.  Probably  "  eat  the 
Passover  "  is  used  here  in  more  general  sense  of  keeping 
the  paschal  feast,  and  is  not  confined  to  eating  of  the 
lamb.  Their  scruple  could  have  had  reference  only  to 
the  paschal  sacrifices  ottered  during  the  same  daj-  before 
evening. 

4.  Jno.  (19  :  14,16),  calls  crucifixion  day  the  prepara- 
tion of  the  Passover.  The  point  at  issue  decides  the  gen- 
uineness of  John's  gospel. 

4  methods  of  meeting  the  difiiculty  : 

1.  iSome  follow  John,  as  most  accurate,  and  allow  that 
the  others  made  a  mistake.  Reasoning:  Jno.  was  an 
apostle,  an  eye-witness,  and  his  gospel  written  last; 
therefore  he  would  correct  their  mistakes.  Bleek  holds 
that  Christ  anticipated  regular  time  of  Passover;  he 
translates  Jno.  13 :  1 — "  Before  the  feast,  when  Jesus 
knew  that  his  hour  was  come  to  depart  out  of  this  world 
unto  the  Father,  having  loved  His  own  who  were  in  the 
world  (He  did  love  them  unto  the  end),  when  a  repast 
was  spread  (or  during  supper,"  &c.  The  seiUence  thus 
formed  is  intricate,  unlike  John's  usual  manner,  and  with- 
out necessity. 

2.  Some  endeavor  to  reconcile  Synopts.  and  John  by 
explaining  away  the  Synoptical  forms.  No  success.  The 
Synoptics  are  explicit. 

3.  Rationalists,  (Bretschneider,  Baur,  Davidson,)  up- 
hold the  synoptical  account  vs.  John,  maintain  the  former 
is  true  history  and  John  not  genuine,  tliink  John  wrote 
with  dogmatic  intent,  not  historically,  and  that  the  error 
shows  he  could  not  have  been  an  eye-witness  as  he 
claims. 


13 

4.  Hengst..  Wiesel.,  Rob.,  (215-222)  and  a  majority  of 
harmonists  hold  that  synoptical  accounts  can  be  made  to* 
harmonize  with  John.  John  nowliere  calls  the  meal  a 
Passover,  and  this  has  negative  weight.  Bat  omits  Lord's 
Supper  and  that  does  not  warrant^the  conclusion  that  no 
such  rite  was  instituted.  He  omits  other  things  design- 
edly, because  he  possessed  the  Synoptists.  The  omission 
is  a  tacit  reference  to  what  they  had  written,  and  what 
needed  no  repetition.     Thus  answer  1st  objection. 

The  2d,  by  making  r.ob  r^c  ^ooz/^^  qualify  sroojc,  or  ere 
TsAo::  yfdzr^aeiy.  If  s/owc,  the  sense  is:  "  Jesus  knowing 
before  the  festival  of  the  Passover,  that  liis  hour  was 
come,"  &c.  In  this  way  the  passage  has  no  bearing  upon 
the  present  question.  If  ere  vsko-  iff6.7zr^azv,  it  is  equiva- 
lent to  festival-eve,  and  here  marks  the  evening  immedi- 
ately before  the  koprq  or  festival  proper,  on  w^hich  eve, 
duiing  suj)per,  our  Lord  manifested  his  love  to  his  dis- 
ciples by  washing  their  feet.  The  3d  (18:  28),  by  extend- 
ing meaning  oi  zAaya.  to  paschal  festival,  and  remember- 
ing that  "eating  the  passover"  meant  not  merely  the 
[)aschal  lamb  of  the  evening  before,  but  sacrifices  and 
unleavened  bread  of  the  whole  Passovei-  week.  The  4th 
(19:  14),  i)y  interpreting  Tzaoaaxe'jrj  as  referring  to  the 
Jewish  Sabbath,  which  actually  occurred  ne.Kt  day.  It 
was  Friday  in  the  passover  season  or  paschal  week. 

Bleek's  Argument. — 1.  According  to  John's  account 
(19  :  31)  15th  Nisan,  the  great  day  of  the  feast  coincided 
that  year  w'lih.  t\\Q.  weekly  Sabbath,  (our  Saturday);  and 
the  day  before  (i.  e.  the  Friday)  would  be  the  preparation 
day  both  for  the  weekly  Sabbath  and  for  the  great  feast 
day.  He  argues  [a)  that  the  Sanhedrim  would  not  have 
sent  an  armed  band  vs.  Jesus  on  the  holy  night  after  the 
eating  of  the  Passover,  because  it  was  expressly  forbid- 
den to  carry  arms  on  the  Sabbath  ;  [b)  that  on  such  a 
night  the  Sanhedrim  would  not  have  sat  in  council  to 
judge  Jesus,  for  to  hold  a  court  of  judgment  on  the  Sab- 
bath was  expressly  forbidden  ;  that  crucifixion  could  not 
take  place  Nisan  15th,  for  it  must  have  been  a  glaring 
violation  of  the  Sabbatical  rest  of  the  day,  according  to 
Jewish  notions  still  in  vogue.  Yet  Bleek  admits  that 
criminals  were  often  arrested  on  the  Sabbath,  and  of 
course,  if  necessary,  by  men  bearing  arms.  In  opposi- 
ton  to  Bleek:  the   strict  Sabbatical  law  w^as  not    appli- 


14 

cable  to  tlie  feast  Sabbath.  Besides  fanatics  would  liave 
•caused  them  to  kill  Christ,  whenever  they  had  opportu- 
nity. (Lk.  23:  2,  18).  If  the  law  did  govern  feast  Sab- 
bath, the  hatred  of  the  Jews  mnde  then^,  break  the  law. 
(Andrews,  457.)  i 

2.  Luke  23:  26,27,  we  read  that  Galilean  women, 
when  they  returnetl  from  the  sepulchre,  prepared  spices, 
and  rested  the  Sabbath  day  according;  to  the  command- 
ment, and  returned  again  to  the  sepulchre  when  Sabbath 
was  past.  Now  it  would  have  been  illegal  for  ti.em  to 
have  prepared  the  spices  on  the  day  preceding  the  Sab- 
bath, if  that  day  was  I^isan  15th.  (Ex.  12  :  16^;  Lev.  23  : 
7).  The  same  argument  applies  to  the  burial  of  Jesus 
by  Joseph  of  Arimathea  on  the  day  of  crucifixion,  and 
sfill  more  strongly  to  Lk.  23  :  26 ;  Mk.  15  :  21.  Simon 
would  not  have  been  in  the  fields  at  work,  Nisan  15th. 
Opposed  :  Here  all  depends  on  the  strictness  with  which 
the  Jews  observed  the  feast  Sabbaths.  Maimonides 
mentions  bathing  and  anointing,  as  things  that  might  be 
done  on  the  feast  days;  and  of  course  then  everything 
necessary  to  prepare  the  dead  for  burial  would  be  per- 
mitted. Multiplication  of  instances  may  show  that  the 
law  does  not  apply. 

3.  The  Synopts.  had,  as  the  basis  of  their  narrative, 
an  account  which  represented  the  14  Nisan,  and  not  the 
15th,  as  the  date  of  Christ's  death.  By  a  misunderstand- 
ing, however,  there  came  to  be  incorporated  with  this 
the  notion  that  Jesus  ate  the  last  supper  with  his  disci- 
ples at  the  hour  legally  instituted  for  the  Jewish  pass- 
over  ;  and  as  we  have  the  Synopts.,  both  representations 
though  non-coincident,  yet  unconsciously  to  the  evange- 
lists, now  lie  side  by  side. 

4.  The  feast  (Easter,  paschal  cont.  of  2d  cent.)  about 
wdiich  the  dispute  was,  was  held  in  Asia  14th  Nisan,  at 
the  hour  in  which  the  Jews  celebrated  their  passover 
(i.  e.,  on  the  night  which,  according  to  Jewish  reckoning, 
began  Msan  15th);  and  hence  Christians  of  Asia  Minor 
who  followed  this  practice  were  called  Quarto-dccimam. 
They  were  chiefly  Jewish  converts,  and  pleaded  the  au- 
thority of  John  and  Philip.  The  western  church,  com- 
posed of  Gentile  converts,  discarded  the  pass.,  and  cele- 
brated annually  the  resurrection  on  a  Sunday,  and 
observed  the  previous  Friday  as  a  day  of  penitence  and 


n 


15 

fiisting  ;  pleaded  authority  of  Peter  and  Paul.  The  Tu- 
bingen school  (llilgenfeld's  Paschasireit,  pp.  5-118  make 
inference  vs.  John  and  say  that  that  Gospel  was  not 
ascribed  to  him  by  the  East,  church.  Neander  (Hist.  I., 
513)  thinks  that  Christians  of  Asia  Minor  celebrated 
Xisan  14th  as  day  of  Chrisfs  death,  but  he  says  that  they 
kept  the  Jewish  passover  and  included  in  it  the  com- 
memoration of  Christ's  death.  Bleek :  "John's  know- 
ledge that  Jesus  had  eaten  the  last  supper  witli  his  disci- 
ples not  on  the  day  legally  fixed,  but  a  day  earlier,  could 
not  have  obliged  him  to  refuse  to  keep  the  yearly  pass., 
as  he  had  been  wont  to  do  at  Jerus'm,  among  Christians 
at  Ephesns,  wlio  also  were  wont  to  celebrate  it,  for  Jesus 
himself  had  kept  the  pass,  in  the  earlier  years  of  his 
ministry.  It  is  likely  too  that  the  Christians  of  Asia 
Minor  subsequently  retained  the  custom  simply  because 
it  had  become  a  custom,  and  because  of  the  opposition 
raised  vs.  it."  Hengst.,  Tliol.  and  Wieseler  urge  that, 
according  to  John,  Jesus  celebrated  last  supper  with 
disciples,  not  on  the  day  of  the  pass,  (evening  of  Nisan 
14th  or  beginning  of  Xisan  15th),  but  a  day  earlier,  and 
therefore  that  John's  account  does  not  diifer  from  that 
of  Synopts.  The  harmonists  find  clear  proof  that  eastern 
and  western  churches  had  all  four  gospels,  proving  they 
knew  all  the  circumsti^nces  and  saw  no  difficulty  in  the 
statements. 

Wieseler:  Xisan  15th  fell  on  Friday,  783  or  A.D.  30. 
The  darkness  at  crucifixion  could  not  have  been  caused 
bj'  an  eclipse,  for  it  was  then  full  moon.  Phlegon,  of 
Tralles,  tries  to  show  that  it  was  caused  bj-  an  eclipse 
which  took  place  between  July  785  and  786.  But  the 
astronomer  Warm,  that  the  eclipse  referred  to  took  place 
782. 

Date  of  the  Baptism. — Six  data  are  given  in  Lk.  3: 
1-2:  "aSTow  in  the  15th  year  (780)  of  reign  of  Tiberius 
Csesar,  Pontius  Pilate  being  Governor  of  Judea  (779 — 
789),  and  Herod  being  tetrarch  of  Galilee  (750 — 792)  and 
his  l)rother  Philip  being  of  Iturea  and  of  the  region  of 
Trachonitis    (750—787),  and    Lysanias    the   tetrarch  of 

Abilene  ( ),  Annas  (759—767)   and   Caiaphas  778 — 

789)  being  the  high  priests."  Luke's  least  carelessness 
or  ignorance  of  the  history  would  lead  to  a  mistake. 
Yet  "his  credibility  remains  unimpeachable.     An  anach- 


16 

roiiism  is  cljargcd.  Joseph  us  mentions  one  Lysaiiias 
killed  sixty  years  before.  Therefore,  it  is  said,  that  Lk. 
is  sixty  years  too  late.  Lysanias  was  probably  a  family 
name.  We  can  see  clearly  why  Luke,  writins^  after  Abi- 
lene had  been  made  a  part  of  tlie  Jewish  kingdom,  should 
have  mentioned  the  fact,  having  apparently  so  little  con- 
nection with  gospel  history,  that  at  the  time  when  the 
Baptist  appeared,  this  tetrarchy  was  under  the  rule  of 
Lysanias.  It  was  an  allusion  to  a  former  well-known 
political  division  that  had  now  ceased  to  exist,  and  was 
to  his  readers  as  distinct  a  mark  of  time  as  his  mention 
of  the  tetrarchy  of  Antipas,  or  Philip.  This  statement 
respecting  Lysanias  shows  the  accuracy  of  Luke's  know- 
ledge of  the  political  history  of  his  times,  and  should 
teach  us  to  rely  upon  it  even  when  unconfirmed  by  con- 
temporaneous writers.  Annas  had  been  high-priest,  yet 
Caiaphas  actually  was  such  when  the  Baptist  appeared. 
The  sovereign  pontificate  had  fallen  to  a  degraded  con- 
dition. The  office  had  become  subject  to  removal.  Dis- 
missal from  it  happened  almost  every  year  (Jos.  Ant., 
15:  3:  1;  18:  2:  2 ;  18  :  5 :  3  ;  20:  9:  1,4).  Caiaphas 
maintained  himself  longer  than  the  rest  (25—36) ;  his 
three  predecessors  only  "about  one  year  each.  As  a  Sad- 
ducee  and  a  priest  he  was  animated  with  double  hatred 
to  the  Saviour.  (Andrews  131—138).  Lightfoot  sup- 
poses that  Annas  was  the  sagan,  or  vicarius  of  the  high- 
priest,  the  next  in  order  to  him,  in  his  absence  to  over- 
see, or  in  his  presence  to  assist,  in  the  oversight  of  the 
affairs  of  the  temple,  and  the  service  of  the  priests 
(C.  W.  H).  Wieseler:  The  common  explanation,  adopted 
by  Farrar,  is  that  Annas  was  Nasi  or  President  of  the 
Sanhedrim. 

Fifteenth  Year  op  Tiberius  Cjssar.- Luke  3:1,  23. 
Augustus  died  Aug.  767.  The  15th  year  of  Tiberius 
began  Aug.  781.  Christ's  1st  Ptissover  then  would  be  in 
782.  But  Luke  3  :  23,  "  he  was  about  30  years  of  age 
when  he  began  his  ministry."  As  already  seen, he  could 
not  have  been  born  later  than  750.  He  must  have  begun 
his  ministry,  therefore,  780,  and  been  baptized  in  that 
year.  Tertullian,  however,  gives  the  15th  year  of  Tibe- 
rius as  the  year  of  Christ's  passion  :  "  Christ  suffered 
under  Tiberius  Cjesar,  R.  Geminus,  and  P.  Gemiuus,  be- 
ing consuls,  on  the  8th  day  before  the  Calends  of  April," 


I  \Q     'l^ 


r^S. 


,  I      r 


17 

(25th  March).  He  was  followed  by  Lactaiitius,  Aucrus- 
tine,  and  others,  especially  of  the  Latin  Fathers.  San 
Clemente  so  explains  Luke  from  chronological  necessity. 
He  attempts  to  show  that  the  15th  year  of  Tiberius  is 
"  not  to  be  referred  to  the  beginnins:  of  the  ministrv  of 
John,  nor  to  the  baptism  suffered  by  Christ  in  Jordan, 
but  to  the  time  of  his  passion  and  crucifixion,  the  evan- 
gelist himself  being  our  leader  and  interpreter."  This 
mjtkes  the  whole  ministry  last  but  few  months;  Christ 
would  be  32  years  old  at  baptism,  and  Jolin's  account  re- 
quires him  to  begin  his  ministry  3  years  before,  and  be- 
fore Luke  makes  Baptist's  ministry  to  begin.  Brown 
thinks  that  the  heading  of  St.  Luke's  8d  chapter  contains 
the  date,  not  of  the  mission  of  John  the  Baptist,  but 
of  the  year  of  our  Lord's  ministry,  especially  in  reference 
to  the  great  events  with  which  it  closed.  Wieseler  refers 
Luke's  words  to  the  imprisonment  of  John,  not  to  tiie 
baptism  of  Christ ;  holds  that  Christ  was  baptized  780, 
John  was  impi'isoned  782,  and  Luke  3:  1  is  anticipatory, 
find  chapter  followinggoes  back  to  period  prior  to  John's 
imprisonment.  The  exegesis  is  violent.  The  usual  so- 
lution (started  by  Zumpt)  is  that  15th  Tiberius  dates  from 
the  time  he  was  made  associate  emperor  (765)  by  the  Sen- 
ate, 2  years  before  the  death  of  Augustus  (767.)  This 
would  bring  7.80  for  the  year  of  baptism  and-  solve  the 
difficulties.  There  are  various  dates  for  computing  the 
reign  Augustus,  according  as  he  increased  in  power. 
The  same  is  true  of  Tiberius.  This  increases  the  diffi- 
culty. Certain  Egyptian  coins  date  from  the  connection 
of  Tiberius  with  Augustus.  Tiberius  obtained  full  con- 
trol in  the  Provinces  in  767.  His  15th  year  then,  779, 
or  first  passover  780.  Luke  3  :  23 — {a)  began  to  be  or 
(6)  was  about  30  when  he  began,  i.  e.  his  public  ministry. 
The  solution  is  confirmed  by  Jno.  2:  20.  Herod 
began  the  temple  in  734;  to  this  add  46  (time  of  build- 
ing) and  the  result  is  780,  the  proper  date. 

RESULTS. 


ROBIXSOX. 

WIESELER. 

Zr.MPT. 

Born 

749 

or 

750 

.    .    750    . 

.  747 

.    Pilate, 

779-789 

Bap. 

779 

or 

780 

.   .   781)  .  , 

.  779 A.  D.  26  ., 

.   Herod, 

750-792 

1st  Pass. 

780 

.  .   781  .   , 

.   780     "    27   . 

.   Philip, 

750-786 

2d      " 

781 

.   .   782  . 

.   781     "    28   . 

.   Lysanias, 

3d      " 

782 

.   782     "    29    . 

.  Annas-, 

759-767 

€ruc. 

783 

."  .'  783  .'  , 

30   . 

.   Caiaphas, 

778-789 

Tib.  765  or  767-782 


18 

Duration  of  the  Public  Ministry.— 3  views  are  held  : 
1.  That  it  was  3i  3'ears ;   2.   2|  years;  3.  1  year  or  less. 

^y(yv^^TyxZu^T\ie  Fathers,  from  Is.   51  :  2,   held   that  it  was  1  year. 

.^^^y^,ui^  -^  But  the  word  year  is  to  be  miderstood  as  the  poetical 
parallel  of  da3%  or  hour.  The  opinion  of  Fathers  is  also 
based  on  tradition  of  crncifixion  15th  Tib.,  782,  com- 
bined with  Luke's  putting  l)aptism  same  year.  (Lk.  3  :  1). 
Brown  holds  that  the  ministrj-  was  1  year,  doubts  the 
text  (of  John)  even  though  it  says  the  feasts  were  pass- 
overs.  The  Syn(^pts.  seem  to  give  an  entirely  different 
account  from  John  ;  they  say  Christ  went  to  Galilee  and 
only  after  considerable  time  went  to  Jerusalem  and  the 
Temple.  John  says  he  went  to  Jerusalem  and  the  Tem- 
ple immediately,  cleansed  the  latter,  &c.  The  feynopts. 
make  no  feast  till  crucifixion  ;  inference,  that  ministry 
was  1  year  or  less  in  length.  John  makes  scene  Judea, 
and  mentions  3  or  4  Passovei's.  The  Sj'uopts.  were 
aware  of  Judean  ministry:  Mtt.  4:  25  ;  27  :  57.  When 
X Saviour  wept  over  Jerusalem,  they  mention  it.  There  is 
no  explanation  exce})t  that  he  had  worked  in  Jerusalem. 
Attempts  to  (werthrow  this  argument  do  not  succeed. 
Bauer  :  that  Jesus  w^eptover  tiie  Jews  in  particular.  B. 
had  to  give  tliis  up.  Strauss  :  that  the  words  are  per- 
sonified wisdom  and  are  quoted  from  lost  writings. 
Schenkel :  that  Jno.'s  mention  of  Passovers  all  refer  to 
one.  Lk.  10  :  38,  another  reference  to  Judean  work.  It 
is  impossible  that  a  pseudo-Jolin  should  represent  the 
course  of  the  Life  of  Christ  so  differently  from  the 
Synopts.,  when  the  latter  were  duly  accredited.  He  wrote 
with  a  dogmatic  purpose,  and  would  not  expect  to  be  be- 
lieved. On  other  hand  John  was  aware  of  the  Galilean 
work.  (7  :  6-9).  He  implies  that  Galilee  had  been  the  chief 
scene  of  our  Saviour's  visitations.  ..He  allows  all  the  time 
necessary  for  it  and  on  several  occasions  leaves  it  to  be 
inferred.  Jno.  6  :  2,  multitudes  went  with  Jesus  because 
of  His  miracles,  but  the  miracles  are  not  related.     Jno. 

,  6  :  ^^,    many  of  his  disciples  went  back  from  him,  but 

Jno.  had  not  told  us  of  the  formation  of  a  band  of  disci- 
ples. Jno.  6  :  70,  the  12  are  mentioned,  but  there  has 
been  no  account  of  their  calling.  Between  chapters  6 
and  7,  there  is  an  interval  of  7  months.  To  reconcile 
Synopts.  and  Jno.,  all  that  can  be  required  is  to  give  a 
good  reason  for  their  differences.     The  Synopts.' plan  in- 


0  P  ;^^, 


19 


eludes  active  life  in  Galilee.  Matt,  seeks  proof  in  mira- 
cles for  Christ's  Messiahship.  Luke  gives  biography  of 
Christ  in  his  active  work.  Jno.  came  later,  when  doc- 
trinal points  were  discussed,  particuhirly  the  person  of 
Christ.  Jno's  purpose  is  to  give  His  own  discourses  so 
that  they  may  know  what  He  claimed  concerning  Him- 
self. It  was  not  in  Galilee,  in  parable,  that  these  pro- 
found Christological  statements  were  made.  It  was 
among  the  educated,  cultivated  Pharisees  of  Jerusalem. 
Renan  :  "  I  dare  def}-  any  person  to  compose  a  consis- 
tent life  of  Jesus,  if  he  makes  account  of  the  discourses 
\yhich  John  attributes  to  Jesus."  ^ 

John's  feasts  :  1.  "  the  Jews'  passover,!-.'  (781)  (Jno.  2:\ 
13);  2.  "  a  feast  of  the  Jews,  (782)  (5  :  1 :"  3.  "  the  Pass, 
nigh,"  (6:  4);  4.  "  Before  Pass,"  (12:  1);  5.  "feast  of 
Tabernacles,"  (7  :  2);  6.  "  feast  of  dedication,"  (10 :  22); 
(Bible  Diet,  for  Pass.,  Pentec,  Tabern.,  Dedic,  and  Pu- 
rim.)  Of  these  feasts  4  were  Passovers,  if  Jno.  6:  1  be 
so  interpreted.  We  gain  or  lose  a  year  here.  Pentecost- 
occurred  this  year  (782)  on  the  19th  of  May.  No  special 
argument  in  it?  favor;  was  not  so  generally  attended  as 
Passover  or  Tabernacles,  and  no  reason  appears  why 
Jesus  should  have  omitted  Passover  and  gone  up  to 
Pente.  Tabernacles  followed,  Sept.  23d.  Chief  argu- 
ment in  its  favor;  it  brings  feast  of  5  :  1  into  close  con- 
nection with  that  of  7  :  2,  and  thus  best  explains  7:  21-23. 
But  some  months  more  or  less  are  not  under  the  circum- 
stances importajit,  for  the  miracle  with  its  results  must 
have  been  fresh  in  their  minds  even  after  a  much  longer 
interval  If  He  had  not  in  the  interval  between  these 
feasts  been  at  Jerusalem,  as  is  most  probable,  His  reap- 
pearance would  naturally  carry  their  minds  back  to  the 
time  when  they  last  saw  him,  and  recall  both  his  work 
and  their  own  machinations  vs.  Him.  The  great  objec- 
tion to  identifying  the  feast  before  us  with  that  of  Taber- 
nacles is  that  it  puts  between  the  end  of  ch.  4,  and  be- 
ginning of  ch.  5,  a  period  of  8  or  9  months,  which  the 
Evangelists  pass  over  in  silence. 

Four  Objections  vs.  Passover. — 1.  Jno.  6  :  4,  "pass- 
over  nigh."  Christ  did  not  attend.  If  not,  then  he  was 
not  at  any  feast  till  Tabernacles  (7 :  2),  a  period  of  18 
mos. ;  was  absent  from  Jerusalem  for  that  time.  Ar- 
gued:  as  a  strict  Jew  he  could  not  have  been  so  long 


20 

away.  An.  :  that  Jesus  should  have  absented  himself 
for  so  long  a  time  from  the  feasts  is  explained  by  the  hos- 
tility of  the  JeAvs,  and  their  purpose  to  slay  Him  (Jno.  5  : 
16-18;  7:  1).  We  know  that  He  would  not  needlessly 
expose  Himself  to  peril.  To  the  laws  of  God  respecting 
the  feasts  He  would  render  all  obedience,  but  with  the 
liberty  of  a  son,  not  the  scrupulosity  of  a  Pharisee.  He 
was  Lord  of  Sabbath  ;  so  He  was  of  the  feasts.  He  at- 
tended them  or  not  as  seemed  best  to  Him.  Chief  argu- 
ment in  favor  of  Purim  is,  that  it  is  brought  into  such 
close  connection  with  the  Passover  (only  7  mos.  absent). 
Ellicott :  "  If  the  note  of  time  derived  from  Jno.  4  :  35  be 
correct,  then  th«  festival  here  mentioned  clearly  falls  be- 
tween the  end  of  1  year  and  the  Passover  of  tlie  one  fol- 
lowing (6  :  4)  and  therefore  can  be  no  other  than  the 
feast  of  Purim."  That  Jesus  should  have  absented  him- 
self a  long  time  from  the  feasts,  is  explained  by  the  hos- 
tility of  the  Jews. 

2.  John  does  not  here  name  the  festival,  whereas  he 
seems  always  to  specify  it  (2  :  13,  23  ;  6  :  4 ;  7  :  2  ;  10  :  23  ; 
11:  55;  12:  1). 

3.  That  if  5  :  1  and  6  :  4  are  Passovers,  there  is  a  whole 
year  of  which  Jno.  gives  no  account.  Ans  :  this  is  in 
accordance  with  analogy  of  Jno. 's  gospel.  The  Synopts 
fill  in  this  and  Jno.  confines  himself  to  feasts.  Andrews: 
"  this  is  not  the  only  instance  in  which  Jno.  narrates 
events  widely  separated  in  time,  without  noting  the  in- 
terval. Thus,  ch.  6  relates  what  took  place  before  a 
Passover,  and  ch.  7  what  took  place  at  feast  of  Taberna- 
cles, 6  months  after.  In  10  :  22  is  a  sudden  transition 
from  Tabernacles  to  Dedication." 

4.  Accounts  for  Synopts.  not  mentioning  feasts.  His 
work  in  Galilee  has  reference  to  national  salvation  thro' 
the  faith  of  those  who  should  believe  on  him  there. 
This  may  explain  their  silence  in  respect  to  the  feasts 
which  Jesus  attended  while  in  Galilee.  Any  transient 
work  at  Jerusalem,  addressing  itself  especially  to  the 
hierarchy,  had  no  important  bearing  upon  the  great 
result. 

For  Passover. — 1.  Common  text  wrongly  omits  arti- 
cle, which  would  naturally  refer  to  chief  feast.  Modern 
critics  and  best  AISS.,  including  Sinaitic,  agree  as  to  this. 
(Winer,  p.  119  or  126).     Lange  :  "  The  article  is  not  ab- 


21 

solutel}-  conclusive,  for  in  Heb.  a  uouii  before  tbe  ^eti. 
is  made  definite  by  prefixing  article,  not  to  noun  itself, 
but  to  the  gen.  and  the  same  is  the  case  in  the  Sept."' 
Ellicott  :  "  The  true  reading  appears  certainly  to  be  eofizrj. 
It  has  in  addition  to  secondary  authorities,  the  support 
of  three  out  of  the  four  leading  uncial  MSS.,  and  is 
adapted  by  Lachm.,  Tisch.,  and  others."  Tholuck  : 
"  Were  the  article  genuine,  we  would  be  compelled  to 
regard  the  Passovei'  as  meant.  If  it  is  not  genuine,  the 
Passover  may  be  meant,  but  so  also  maysome  other 
feast."     (Andrews,  172). 

2.  Phrase  "  feast  of  the  Jews"  is  not  applicable  to 
Purim.  P.  was  "not  a  Mosaic  feast,  nor  of  divine  ap- 
])ointment,  but  established  by  the  Jews  while  in  captivity, 
in  commemoration  of  tlieir  deliverance  from  the  murder- 
ous plans  of  Haman.  (Esther,  3  and  9).  It  was  national 
and  political,  rather  than  religious.  Why  then  should 
Jews  go  up  from  Jerusalem  to  this  f 'ast  ?  Ellicott: 
"  The  view  of  the  best  recent  harmonists  and  commen- 
tators is  that  feast  was  the  feast  of  Purim."  Lauije : 
"  Fanaticism  in  the  people  naturally  sought  to  make  it  a 
festival  of  triumph  over  the  Gentiles  (subsequently  over 
the  Christians  also).  On  this  account,  the  particular  feast 
was  p)reeminently  the  f east  of  the  Jews  (with  the  art.)  and 
the  art.  in  C.  Sinaiticus  cannot  be  made  to  speak  exclu- 
sively for  pass." 

•  3.  Jesus  went  and  found  a  crowd.  J',  was  observed 
all  over  tlie  land  :  had  no  reference  to  Jerus.  TSTo  special 
services  were  appointed  for  its  observance  at  the  temple, 
nor  does  it  appear  that  it  was  their  custom.  Each  Jew 
observed  it  wherever  he  chanced  to  be.  Lange  :  "Christ 
may  have  attended  this  f.  as  he  attended  other  festivals, 
(7:  2;  10  :  22)  without  legal  obligation,  merely  for  pur- 
pose of  doing  good." 

4.  JSTo  adequate  motive  is  assigned  for  Christ's  going 
to  Jerusalem  :  he  was  not  required  to  do  so  by  the  law. 
Ellicott:  "In  the  year  under  consideration,  Passover 
would  occur  only  a  month  afterward,  and  our  Lord  might 
well  have  thought  it  was  advisable  to  fix  his  abode  at 
Jerusalem  and  to  commence  his  preaching  before  the 
hurried  influx  of  the  multitudes  that  came  up  to  the  great 
yearly  festival." 


00 


5.  Healing  of  infirm  man  was  on  a  Sabbath.  The  fes- 
tival of  Purim  lasted  2  days,  and  was  regularly  observed 
on  14th  and  15th  Adar  (March);  but  if  i4th  happened  to 
fall  on  Sabbath,  or  on  2d  or  4th  day  of  tlie  week,  the 
commencement  of  the  fest.  was  deferred  until  the  next 
day.  Pnrim  was  never  celebrated  as  a  Sabb.  Lange  : 
"  The  Sabb.  spoken  of  5  :  9  may  have  preceded  or  suc- 
ceeded the  feast." 

6.  Lk.  13  :  6-7.  "  These  3  years."  Hengst.  says  the 
reference  is  to  Jewish  people,  among  whoni^  Christ  had 
wrought  for  3  years.  But  we  cannot  draw  argument  from 
parable  ;  not  conclusive  enough,  Andrews  :  ''  It  is  doubt- 
ful whether  the  expression  has  any  chronological  value." 
Lange:  "If  one  insists  on  having  a  def  time  for  God's 
work  of  grace  on  Isr.,  we  may  reckon  the  time  from  the 
public  appearance  of  Jno.  B.,  one-half  year  before  the 
entrance  of  Jesus  upon  his  office,  up  to  the  present  mo- 
ment, which  altogether  does  not  make  up  much  less  than 
three  years." 

7.  Time  needed  for  events.  Otherwise  we  must  com- 
press into  one  month,  what  according  to  the  other  scheme 
took  a  whole  year.  It  can  hardly  be  conceived  that  he 
should  have  done  so  much  in  such  narrow  limits.  The 
harmony  will  make  Christ's  ministry  3J  years  (Rob.)  or 
2J  (Wiese.  and  Zumpt.) 

y^,A-'ijbA''(  PREPARATORY  PERIOD. 

§1.  Limits  :  from  beginning  of  gospel  narrative  until 
entrance  upon  public  ministry.  Subdivision  :  (a)  all  pre- 
ceding nativity  ;  (b)  all  succeeding  it  until  entrance  upon 
public  ministry.  Mtt.  and  Lk.  are  authorities  for  nativ- 
ity, and  are  supplementary  to  one  another,  in  no  case 
parallel.  Matt,  gives  histor.  proof  that  Jesus  was  the 
Messh.  of  O.  T.  Therefore  he  records  his  birth,  gene- 
alogy, and  other  events  connected  therewith.  Lk.  gives 
events  in  order,  and  therefore  goes  back  to  annunciation 
and  to  his  predecessor.  Mk.  portrays  active  life  of  Christ. 
John's  design  is  to  represent  him  as  a  historic  person  in 
his  own  words.  The  history  differs  from  every  other  h. 
The  facts  have  no  parallel  ;  naturally  it  should  have  none. 
The  miraculous  element  predominates  here  as  nowhere 
else.  This  is  history  written  for  a  purpose.  Charged  : 
that  it  was  written  afterward.    But  we  have,  intermingled, 


ct>  THa^ 


23 

the  divine,  angelic,  and  linman.  When  the  Son  of  God 
was  to  come,  there  must  be  peculiar  circumstances.  Un- 
believers stumble  here,  and  believers  find  proof  for  o-en- 
uineness.  Some  believers,  however,  find  their  stron'o-est 
difficulty  liere. 

Classification  of  characteristics  :  (a)  Events  were  to 
be  so  adapted  as  to  form  basis  of  our  faith.  If  it  be  true 
that  Son  of  God  became  S.  of  man,  it  is  more  than 
probable  it  was  done  in  this  way.  We  must  have  prac- 
tical evidence  of  birth  at  the  time  of  its  occurrence.  It 
would  not  do  to  attest  it  afterward,  else  it  would  be 
charged  that  it  was  an  invention,  or  dream  of  an  enthu- 
siast. Ebionites  and  Socinians  say  he  became  Son  of 
God  first  at  baptism.  Miraculous  element,  therefore,  is 
inseparable  from  the  hist.  It  grows  out  of  it  from  the 
very  nature  of  the  case.  Incarnation  itself  the  greatest 
miracle,  (b)  Publicity  must  be  secured;  attention  at- 
tracted. Chain  of  evidence  was  so  good,  as  here  written, 
that  it  was  neve-r  doubted  by  enemies  (primitively),  (c) 
The  child  must  be  secured,  so  as  not  to  appear  a  rival  of 
civil  rulers,  and  to  prevent  prematare  action  by  them. 
Yet  witnesses  must  be  numerous  enough  to  identify 
Christ  from  birth  ;  to  show  that  babe  of  Bethlehem  and 
Jesus  of  JSTaz.  were  one  and  same  person,  [d)  While 
humility  of  Son  of  God  was  to  be  shown,  yet  from  first 
moment,  he  must  be  attended  with  all  dignity  and  honor 
due  to  divinity.  He  must  bring  heaven  with  him, 
angelic  choir,  homage  of  good  men  (Sheph'ds  and  Magi.) 
As  at  cross,  so  at  manger,  humility  is  relieved  by 
heavenly  dignities,  (e)  Ante-typical;  as  life  and  death 
of  Christ  are  the  final  facts  of  O.  T.,  it  must  be  shown 
he  came  to  fulfill  it.  Unity  of  divine  plan  must  be  vin- 
dicated ;  his  relation  to  the  law  be  made  clear.  These 
things  belong  to  this  period  as  preparatory.  If  men  had 
been  left  in  doubt,  they  would  have  rejected  Christ  at 
beginning  of  his  ministry.  Hence  we  read  repeatedly, 
■'■  all  this,  that  the  Scriptures"  &c.  ;  we  see  express  re- 
cognition of  faithful  few,  in  whom  spirit  of  old  economy 
was  manifested.  Gospel  hist,  is  last  ch.  of  old  dispens'u. 
N.  T.  begins  with  Pentecost,  where  O.  T.  scenery,  poe- 
try, &c.,  find  their  fulfillment.  (/)  Typical;  his  life  is 
type  of  every  Chn.  and  of  Church  as  whole.  Old  econ- 
omy is  typical  bee.  it  points  to  the  future,  as  it  embodies 


24 

what  lias  been  already  realized.  That  very  life  in  whicli 
the  old  is  fulfilled  is  still  a  type  of  Chii.  spiritual  life. 
Impossible  to  interpret  Gospels  and  Acts,  without  vio- 
lating meaning,  unless  we  believe  facts  are  arranged 
purposely  to  embody  the  doct.,  the  spiritual  truth.  Such 
were  miracles,  the  fact  that  he  carried  his  dealings  be- 
yond borders  of  Palestine  (gospel  for  world).  Why  did 
he  attend  temple  ?  why  submit  to  eircum.  ?  to  teach  the 
evil  of  sin. 

§2.  Official  character  of  John  Baptist  was  necessary 
at  outset.  Ritualists  claim  Christ  was  disciple  of  John, 
that  his  work  grew  out  of  John's.  Annunc'n  of  Bapt's 
birth  prepared  people  and  his  parents  to  understand  his 
mission,  and  how  to  treat  him.  Honor  is  done  to  O.  T. 
in  choosing  priest  of  temple  (1  Chron.,  24),  prophecy  is 
fulfilled,  type  is  given,  in  declaration  that  John  was  to 
be  a  Nazarite  from  the  womb  (as  Samuel  and  Samson). 
Spiritual  meaning  of  incense  is  seen  (prayer);  Lk.  1  :  10. 
Emphasis  is  laid  on  character  of  parents  (Lk.  1  :  6),  they 
were  observers  of  rites  and  exercised  a  lively  faith.  Cer- 
emonial righteousness  was  their  possession.  Mass  of  the 
Jews  corrupt.  But  some  were  willing  to  introduce  new 
economy.  Meaning  of  both  names  was  explained  and 
fulfilled  by  what  happened  to  those  who  bore  them  : 
Zach.  (the  Lord  remembers),  Eliz.  (God's  oath.)  Hope 
of  giving  birth  to  the  deliverer  was  common  among  Jew- 
ish women.  400  yrs.  angelic  visitation  had  been  discon- 
tinued, now  it  is  renewed.  John  as  Nazarite  (Numb.  6  : 
1-21)  was  to  be  a  reformer.  Mai.  4  :  6,  the  Jewish  con- 
ception of  this  p'cy  was  that  E.  was  to  be  the  forerunner 
and  hence  had  not  died.  This  impression  was  to  be  cor- 
rected. Z's  faith  not  strong  enough  at  first ;  asks  a  sign, 
and  is  given  one  (dumbness,  a  punishment  for  his  unbe- 
lief). "As  faith  is  to  be  the  chief  condition  of  the  new 
covenant,  it  w^as  needful  that  the  first  manifestation  of 
unbelief  should  be  emphatically  punished;  butthewound 
inflicted  becomes  a  healing  medicine  for  the  soul," 
(Lange). 

Objections  answered  :  1.  Z's  treatment  was  not  only 
punitive  but  was  to  confirm  his  faith,  and  to  be  a  lesson 
to  the  people.  2.  Strauss  objects,  that  a  name  is  given 
to  an  individual  angel,  wh.  we  do  not  find  in  0.  T.  until 
after  the  captivity  in  Danl.     Obj'n  is  therefore  that  Jews 


25 

had  no  doct.  of  angels  before  captivity,  that  they  bor- 
rowed tlieir  ideas  from  Persians.  If  so,  how  came  they 
to  have  Hebrew  names?  Furthermore  (a)  the  O.  T.  is 
full  of  the  doct.  ;  and  (/>)  we  have  no  proof  that  Jews 
borrowed  from  Persians;  (c)  Tho'  names  are  given  to 
none  until  Dan.'s  time,  yet  it  is  characteristic  of  O.  T.  to 
be  progressive.  Names  of  angels  might  be  expected  in 
an  Apocalyptic  book  like  Dan.  (d)  Doct.  of  angels  was 
received  and  confirmed  by  Christ  and  Apostles.  3. 
Doubted,  whether  such  definite  names  are  borne  in 
heaven.  Gab'l  represents  ministries  of  angels  toward 
man  ;  Mich,  is  type  and  leader  of  their  strife,  in  God's 
name  and  His  strength  vs.  the  power  of  Satan.  In  0.  T., 
therefore,  he  is  guardian  of  Jewish  people  in  their  antag- 
onism to  godless  power  and  heathenism.  Many  Reform- 
ers embraced  idea  that  Mich,  is  Christ.  If  true,  some 
would  represent  name  of  Gab'l  (man  of  God)  in  same 
way.  Interpretation  is  inadmissible.  Whenever  angel 
Jehovah  appears,  it  is  always  as  God.  We  are  never  left 
in  doubt. 

Myth,  theory  holds  that  this  was  a  myth'l  age,  that 
disciples  believed  Christ  was  raised  from  dead,  owing  to 
the  enthusiastic  statements  of  the  women.  Myth  is  a 
story  or  narrative,  involving  moral  or  relig.  truth,  in  wh. 
narrative  form  and  idea  involved  are  blended.  There  is 
no  conscious  invention  to  give  birth  to  a  popular  idea. 
This  theory  saves  moral  character  of  ea,r\y  disciples  ; 
holds  that  John  became  imp.  after  he  began  his  public 
ministry,  and  these  stories  grew  up  in  connection  with 
both.  Only  question  is,  how  much  is  mythical  and  how 
much  historical  ?  Practical  application  of  the  theory 
necessitates  in  many  cases  the  charge  of  conscious  deceit. 
Naturalistic  exp.  maintains  that  Christ  worked  great  cures, 
but  by  nat.  causes.  He  seemed  to  raise  from  dead,  but 
the  man  was  not  dead.  So  here,  Z.  was  paralyzed  owing 
to  excitement.  Tendency  hypoth.  holds  that  there  was  a 
conscious  falsification  of  history  in  accommodation  to 
certain  current  ideas  ;  hist,  is  rewritten  to  give  currency 
to  certain  doctrines.  Strauss  (2d  Life)  came  over  to  this 
theory;  shifted  his  ground.  Legendary  theory  (Renan) 
holds  there  is  a  basis  of  fact,  but  altered  by  blending  of 
natural  enthusiasm  and  pious  fraud  ;  very  much  like 
leo^ends  of  saints  in  Rom.  church.     Renan  adopts  more 


26 

of  Gospels  than  others,  because  his  romancing  is  not 
bound  by  so  doing;  his  method  is  not  so  destructive  as 
Strauss's. 

§3.  Six  mos.  after  conception  of  Elizabeth,  an  angel 
(Gab.)  appears  to  Mary  and  announces  that  she  was  to 
give  birth  to  Messiah.  Points  of  analogy  and  contrast 
with  annunc'n  and  birth  of  John  (Alexander): 

1.  Analogy  : 

(rt)  Both  were  announced  by  angel  of  God. 
{h)  "         to  be  extraordinary. 

(c)  "  named  by  the  angel. 

{(()  "         connected  with  prophecy. 

((?)  Offices  of  both  were  described. 
(/)  In  both,  a  sign  was  given  to  strengthen  faith  of 
the  parents. 

2.  Contrast : 

[a)  John's  was  communicated  to  priest  in  the  temple  ; 
Christ's  to  humble  virgin  in  small  town  of  Galilee. 

(6)  John's  announcement  was  more  honorable  than 
Christ's  birth, 

(c)  Our  Lord  surrounded  his  messenger  with  pomp 
which  he  denied  to  himself. 

The  announcement  must  be  made  previously  to  his 
birth,  that  the  woman  may  know  what  was  happening  to 
her.  Is.  7:  14  fulfilled  in  Mt,  1  :  23.  A  virgin  betrothed 
should  be  chosen,  partly  that  she  miglit  be  protected  by 
a  good  man  in  circumstances  into  whicli  she  was  brought, 
partly  that  the  heirship  tt)  the  throne  might  be  conformed 
to.  Two  points  :  1.  Whether  both  (J.  and  M.)  were  of 
house  of  David.  2.  Whether  Lk.  1 :  27  is  to  be  confined 
to  Jos.  Angel  tells  M.  that  the  child  must  be  of  h.  of  D. 
What  meaning  would  this  have  to  her  before  her  concep- 
tion, unless  she  knew  that  she  was  of  h.  of  D.  ?  Lange 
"The  words  relate  solely  to  J.  They  by  no  means  deny 
descent  of  M.  from  D."  Annunc'n  was  privlite  to  avoid 
notice  of  civil  authorities  and  the  jealousy  of  Herod.  Lk. 
1 :  32,  Dan,  7 :  14,  his  kingship  over  Israel  is  promised. 
For  M,,  intimate  with  O.  T,,this  p'cy  wd,  contain  essence 
of  most  remarkable  promises  (2  Sam,  7,  Ps,  45,  Is.  9, 
Mic.  5).  Lk.  1 :  42,  44,  the  extraordinary  conception  of 
her  kinswoman  was  a  sign  of  more  ext.  c.  of  her  own. 

Objections:  1,  That  doct,  of  immac.  conception  is 
inadequate  to  account  for  sinlessness  of  Jesus.     But   he 


27 

who  was  light  and  life  of  men  must  sarely  see  light  of 
clay,  not  by  carnal  procreation,  [)at  by  inimediate  exer- 
cise of  divine  power.  How  could  he  be  free  from  every 
taint  of  original  sin,  and  redeem  us  from  power  of  sin,  if 
he  had  been  born  by  iieshly  intercourse  of  sinful  parents? 
The  strong  and  healthy  graft  which  was  to  bring  new  life 
into  the  diseased  stock,  must  not  originate  from  this  stock. 
but  be  grafted  into  it  from  without.  Miraculous  con- 
cep.  19  a  axduoolou  to  those  alone  who  will  see  in  our  Lord 
nothing  but  pure  humanity,  and  who  put  hiB  sinlessness 
in  place  of  tlie  real  incarnation  of  God  in  him.  Ration- 
alistic explanation  :  that  he  was  of  ordinary  birth,  and 
that  this  view  existed  among  the  Jews,  and  continued 
until  the  5th  cent.  By  that  "time,  gospels  were  embel- 
lished to  give  expression  to  current  views,  and  the  con- 
clusion is  the  immaculate  concep.  Answ'd  :  (a)  The  re- 
lation in  wh.  Christ  stands  to  his  mother  is  emphasized, 
as  compared  with  Jos.  The  latter  is  never  mentioned 
except  as  protector  of  Christ's  infancy.  From  the  moment 
of  the  conception,  the  Holy  Spirit  continued  to  influence 
and  penetrate  mind  and  spirit  of  M.,  to  suppress  power 
of  sin  and  make  her  body  his  consecrated  temple,  (b) 
Titles,  "  born  of  a  woman,"  "  made  flesh,"  "  son  of  man," 
the  constant  reference  to  mode  of  his  origin,  as  well  as 
the  nature  of  his  constitution  show  his  relation  to  the 
woman  was  more  important  than  to  the  man.  (c)  The 
doctrine  is  based  on  prophecy.  2.  That  in  gospels  he  is 
son  of  Jos.  (John  1 :  45  ;  Lk.  4 :  22  and  2  :"48).  Mary, 
in  publicly  speaking  to  her  son  of  Jos.,  must  saj-  "  thy 
father."  Pressense:  "  This  assertion  .sow  of  Jos.  is  always 
put  into  mouth  of  Jews  as  sign  of  unbelief  or  contempt. 
It  is  even  so  in  the  case  of  ISTathaniel."  3.  That  the 
doctrine  is  not  found  elsewhere  in  N.  T.  Then  we  have 
no  Saviour. 

Naturalists  and  others  indulge  in  diflerent  forms  of 
blasphemous  interpretation.  They  deprive  Jos.'s  bride 
of  chastity  and  purity,  her  richest  dowry.  The  notion 
was  first  conceived  in  brain  of  heathen  (Celsus)  who  de- 
rides mother  of  Jesus  as  victim  of  seduction.  Jewish 
version  of  this  fable  {raiionalismus  vulgaris)  names  one 
Panthera  or  Pandira  as  her  seducer.  Myth,  theory :  that 
this  conception  in  cont.  to  hist,  probability,  that  Jews 
did  not  sympathize  with  expression  "sons  of  God,"  bee. 


28 

polytheistic.  It  was  a  story  invented  to  support  church 
claims,  referring  to  the  religious  feeling  of  ancients,  who 
revered  their  great  men  so  much  as  to  make  them  sons 
of  God  (numerous  in  mytiiology.)  So  also,  it  is  said, 
the  Evangelists  did  with  Christ. 

§4.  Visit  of  Mary  to  Eliz.  Ebrard  and  others  :  that 
Jos.  had  taken  his  betrothed  wife  to  his  home,  after  a 
public  solemnization  of  their  nuptials,  before  this  jour- 
ney. Alford:  *'  that  as  a  betrothed  virgin  she  could  not 
travel  alone."  But  that  no  unmarried  female  could 
journey  to  visit  her  friends  is  incredible.  M.  may  have 
journeyed  with  friends,  or  under  spec'l  protection  of  a  ser- 
vant, or  with  neighbors  going  to  Pass.  Lange:  "She  told 
Jos.  of  visit  of  angel."  But  Jos.'s  knowledge  of  her  con- 
dition was  subsequent  to  her  return.  M.  leaves  it  to  God 
to  enlighten  him  as  He  had  her.     3-fold  design  of  visit  : 

1.  To  give  occasion  for  exercise  of  the  spirit  of  inspi- 
ration, to  confirm  claims  of  the  2  children. 

2.  To  connect  these  extraordinary  events  in  minds  of 
people,  before  these  persons  were  born.  The  children 
were  brought  together  in  the  bosoms  of  their  mothers. 

3.  To  make  known  their  relative  dignity  ;  Jesus  over 
John.  ^ — ■ ^       X 

Mary's  hymn  is  modeled  on  Hannah's.  (1st  Sam.  2).  \ 
It  may  be  divided  into  3  or  4  strophes,  forming  an  ani- 
mated doxology.  The  grace  of  God  (Lk.  1  :  48),  his  om- 
nipotence (49-51),  his  holiness  (49,  51,  54,)  his  justice 
(52-3),  and  especially  his  faithfulness  (54-5),  are  cele- 
brated. It  sounds  like  an  echo  of  Miriam's  and  Debor- 
ah's harps  ;  has  characteristics  of  Heb.  poetry,  in  tone 
and  language,  and  can  be  rendered  almost  word  for  vi^ord. 
Historically,  it  is  important  as  showing  the  Messianic 
hope,  and  the  form  of  Messianic  expectation.  Lk.'s  pre- 
face is  classical  Greek  ;  yet  this  hymn  is  in  best  Hebrew. 
This  fact  confirms  hist,  proof  of  text.  Obj'ns  :  Rational- 
ists reject  the  supernatural  and  account  for  it  on  nat. 
o-rounds.  Meyer  rejects  it  on  purely  subjective  grounds 
(M.  could  not  go  alone  and  Eliz.  would  not  receive  her). 
Strauss  consistently  rejects  all,  even  the  relationship  bet. 
Jesus  and  John.  Home  of  Zach. :  "  The  supposition  is 
that  Vou^a  (Lk.  1  :  39)  has  been  substituted  for  '  I  our  a, 
and  it  is  credible."  (Lange.)  Most  common  idea:  that 
Hebron  was  the  place,  bee.  in  "  the  hill  country."  It  was 
17  miles  S.  of  Jerusalem.     (20  Rom.  miles.) 


/ 


•     29 

§5.  Birth  of  John.  Effect  was  shown  by  the  concourse 
at  his  circumcision.  It  was  customary  to  name  child  on 
same  day  as  circumcision  (Gen.  21 :  3,  4).  Eliz.  insisted 
on  his  being  called  John.  Some  say  that  Zach.  had  not 
told  Eliz.  of  the  name  given  in  temple.  Therefore  this 
was  new  revelation.  Most  likely  he  had  told  her.  From 
making  signs  to  Zach.,  some  have  inferred  that  he  was 
deaf  as  well  as  dumb.  Others  :  it  was  to  spare  the  feel- 
ings of  mother.  Zach.  wrote  on  tablet  that  his  name  was 
John  (already  given  and  not  open  to  change).  The  first 
N.  T.  writing  opens  with  grace.'  Prophetic  cycles  accom- 
panied great  hist,  epochs;  there  is  an  equal  advance  of 
proph.  with  hist.  It  comes  at  revolutionary  periods; 
Moses,  Joshua  and  Judges,  the  completed  kingdom  un- 
der David  and  Solomon  ;  Isaiah,  Hosea,  &c.,  during  As- 
syrian period  ;  Jere.,  Hab'k,  Zeph.,  during  period  of 
exile. 

Zachariah's  song  was  to  Jewish  witnesses  a  renewal  of 
inspiration,  the  highest  circumstance  of  the  occurrence. 
For  400  years  it  had  ceased.  By  its  renewal,  they  regard- 
ed a  new  national  change  as  intended.  Like  Mary's,  it 
refers  to  fulfillment  of  0.  T.  prophecies,  but  is  not  based 
on  any  O.  T.  song,  and  is  more  national  than  individual. 
In  Mary's  there  is  a  relative  want  of  originality,  and  it  is 
full  of  rerainiscenses.  Lange  :  "  The  royal  spirit  is  more 
expressed  in  her  song;  the  priestly  character  in  Zach.'s 
In  his  the  O.  T.  type,  in  hers  the  New  prevails."  Mary's 
expectations  of  the  Messiah  (Lk.  1:  5)  were  not  of  a  par- 
ticular and  exclusive,  but  of  an  universal  nat.  Zach's 
song  (Lk.  1  :  76,  78)  is  a  striking  proof  of  the  prevalence 
of  theocratic  over  paternal  feeling,  as  the  Mssh.  is  always 
placed  in  a  more  prominent  position  than  his  forerunner, 
Dayspring,  Mai.  4 :  2.  Both  songs  breathe  theocratic 
spirit  of  O.  T. ;  show  the  expectation  of  Him  who  was 
to  have  spiritual  rule.  John  dwelt  by  himself  in  wild 
and  thinly  peopled  region  S.  W.  of  Dead  Sea  near  his 
home,  perhaps  to  show  by  his  seclusion  that  he  was  un- 
instructed  in  ordinary  way  but  by  Holy  Ghost.  Renan  : 
"  the  masses  had  become  accustomed  to  look  upon  '  the 
man  of  God' as  a  hermit.  They  imagined  that  all  the 
holy  personages  had  their  days  of  penitence,  of  severe 
life,  and  of  austerities.  It  was  readily  conceived  that 
the  leaders  of  sects  must  be  recluses,  having  their  pecu- 


30     • 

liar  rules  and  their  institutes,  like  the  founders  of  rel. 
orders."  Strauss  and  Meyer  see  in  his  seclusion,  influ- 
ence of  the  Essenes  (m^'st.  ascetics  and  devotees).  But 
there  is  no  analogy.  'N.  T.  does  not  mention  them, 
Joseph  us  does  largely. 

§6.  Annunciation  to  Joseph  nee,  bee.  a  direct  wit- 
ness was  needed  to  the  person  most  interested,  to  show 
that  her  acct.  was  not  a  mistake  nor  a  matter  of  mere 
enthusiasm.  Her  explanations  were  not  believed  and  her 
faith  was  tested.  Jos.  determ'd  to  divorce  her  (privately). 
Milman  :  "  Bill  of  divorce  was  nee.  even  when  the  par- 
ties were  only  betrothed,  and  where  the  marriage  had 
not  actually  been  solemnized.  It  is  probable  that  the 
Mosaic  law  wh.  in  such  cases  adjudged  a  female  to  death 
(Dt.  20  :  23-5)  was  not  at  this  time  executed  in  its  origi- 
nal vigor."  Joseph  was  dtxacoz  (Mtt.  1  :  19),  not  kind, 
but  legally  just,  merciful.  A  public  divorce  would  be 
in  writing  from  the  priest,  with  the  causes  of  it  stated, 
else  the  woman  could  not  marry  again.  Annunciation  - 
was  at  Naz.  God  appears  4  times  to  him  in  a  dream  (Mtt. 
1  :  20  ;  2  :  13  ;  2  :  19 ;  2  :  22).  Prophecy  of  Mtt.  1  :  22  is 
littered  by  the  angel,  from  Is.  7  :  14.  Strauss  :  it  is  not 
at  all  applicable  to  Christ ;  theEvgst.  by  mistake  thought 
it  was.  Alexander:  "the  application  of  it  to  Christ  is 
not  a  mere  accommodation,  meaning  that  the  words 
originally  used  in  one  sense,  and  in  reference  to  one 
object,  might  now  be  repeated  in  another  sense,  and  of 
another  subject ;  for  this  does  not  satisfy  the  strong  sense 
of  the  passage  (that  it  might  be  fulfilled),  nor  would  such 
a  fanciful  coincidence  have  been  alleged  with  so  much 
emphasis  by  Mtt.,  still  less  by  the  angel.  The  only  sense 
that  can  be  reasonably  put  upon  the  words  is,  that  the 
miraculous  conception  of  Mssh.  was  predicted  by  Is.  in 
the  words  here  quoted.  This  essential  meaning  is  not 
affected  by  the  question  whether  the  prediction  was  first 
fulfilled  in  the  nat.  birth  of  a  child  soon  after  it  was 
uttered,  and  the  subsequent  deliverance  of  Judah  from 
invasion,  but  again  fulfilled  in  a  higher  sense,  in  the  na- 
tivity of  Christ ;  or  whether  it  related  only  to  the  latter, 
and  presented  it  to  Ahaz  as  a  pledge  that  the  chosen 
people  could  not  be  destroyed  until  Mssh.  came."  Best 
resort  is  (Hengst.)  that  the  prophecy  applies  to  Christ, 
and  is  presented  to  Ahaz  as  the  sign  of  deliverance. 


^1   /  ^c<^'06'C 


QUui^Cti  fXOC'^    J^j>nAA.<>ijud^CcZo6~x^  c^t^t^^^  ^-^^U^^^^^^JcMjt 


31 

Matt,  gives  anuunc.  to  Jos.  only;  Lk.  to  Mary  only. 
Objected:  1.  That  these  accts.  exclude  each  other.  2. 
That  the  child's  name  was  given  to  Jos.,  after  it  had  been 
given  to  Mary;  therefore  not  nee.  second  time.  The 
two  accounts  harmonize  and  confirm  each  other.  Each 
supposes  the  same  basis  of  fact.  («)  Silence  in  one  hist, 
does  not  contradict  astatement  in  another,  (b)  Selection 
of  incidents  is  ace.  to  their  respective  plans.  xMatt.  liv- 
ing Jos's  genealogy,  must  show  how  Jos.  took  Mary  as 
his  wife.  He  is  theocratic.  Jesus  is  presented  as  ful- 
fillment of  the  theocracy.  Lk.  supplements  Matt,  and 
gives  what  belongs  to  Christ's  human  relations;  depicts 
the  Son  of  Man  appearing  in  Israel,  but  for  benefit  of 
whole  race  of  man, 

§7.  Birth  of  Jesus  was  at  Beth,  In  consequence  of  an 
edict  that  all  the  world  should  be  taxed,  Jos.  and  Mary 
leave  JSTaz.  to  go  to  Beth,  the  city  of  Dav,  to  be  taxed 
there.  Pressense:  '-The  Jewish  law  laid  no  obligation 
on  a  woman  to  undertake  such  a  journey,  for  the  writing 
of  her  name  was  enough.  But  who  can  wonder  at  the 
young  wife,  situated  like  Mary,  accompanj'ing  her  pro- 
tector ?  Besides,  she  was  not  ignorant  of  the  prophecy 
which  pointed  out  Beth,  as  the  city  of  Messiah."  Lk. 
dates  from  decree  of  Augustus,  bee.  it  was  the  occasion 
that  brought  Jos.  and  Mary  to  Bethlehem.  It  suggests 
1,  That  the  Saviour  was  born  during  the  reign  of  Augus- 
tus (the  golden  age  of  Roman  history),  2,  That  the 
theocracy  had  sunk  to  its  lowest  possible  level,  3.  That 
the  parents  enrolled  their  names  in  the  registration  of 
the  whole  world,  ,\  VU-(;u3  4/otXA.  o/.  t:fcv-e^AjL (>/ xu<yrQi- 

Jewish  law  required  the  enl'olment  of  women  and 
hence  this  law  took  them  to  Beth.  (See  preceding  quot. 
from  Pressense).  Farrar :  "  Women  were  liable  to  a 
capitation  tax,  if  this  enrolment  {dTToypaiprj)  also  involved 
taxation  [dnou/jir^a::;)."  The  Roman  law  cared  not  where; 
it  required,  however,  enrolment  of  whole  world,  and 
hence  Mary  is  included.  Lange:  "The enrolment  would 
naturally  take  place  in  Judea,  in  consideration  of  the 
claims  of  nationality.  The  policy  of  Rome,  as  well  as 
the  relig.  scruples  of  the  Jews,  demanded  it.  For  this 
reason,  every  one  went  to  his  ancestral  city  to  be  regis- 
tered, though  in  other  cases  the  Roman  census  might  be 
taken,  either  ace.  to  place  of  residence  or  forum  originis." 


32  ,      . 

Place  of  birth  a  manger  :  evidently  so  ordered  to  signify 
the  voluntary  self-denial  of  Jesus.  Calvin  :  "  descend- 
ants of  the  royal  race  were  designedly,  harshly,  and  in- 
hospitably treated  by  Rom.  officials."  Lange  :  "  that 
Jos.  and  Mary  were  poor."  But  we  are  not  to  under- 
stand that  they  were  poor  or  oppressed  by  Rom,  authori- 
ties.    It  was  simply  bee.  there  was  no  room  for  them  in 

the  inn.     Justin  Martyr  places  the  birth  in  a  cave.     The 

khan  wld.  probably  remain  for  long  time  in  the  East,  y^^ 
"Land  and  Book"  I,  533;  (Thomson  quoted,  Andrews 
81  ;  Farrar  I,  3-6;  W.  Hepworth  Dixon's  Holy  Land,  I, 
ch.  13).  Matt,  makes  no  reference  to  the  home,  but 
speaks  as  if  they  came  to  it  for  first  time.  Lk.  represents 
them  as  living  there  beforehand.  Rationalists  deny  that 
he  was  born  in  Beth.,  saj-  that  he  was  born  in  Naz. 
Strauss  rejects  both  acc'ts.  Renan  :  "  It  is  only  by  an 
awkward  detourthatthe  leo^end  succeedsin  fixin2:his birth 
■at  Beth."  R.  says  that  the  royal  line  from  D.  had  become 
extinct,  but  that  Christ's  birth  must  be  fixed  at  Beth., 
bee.  of  prophecy.  Ans.  :  (a)  The  acc'ts  are  not  contra- 
dictory but  compleraental.  (b)  Matt,  calls  attention  to 
both  places,  simply  to  speak  of  the  fulfillment  of  proph- 
ecy.    Lk.  gives  the  sequence  of  events. 

§8.  Design  of  annunciation  to  Shepherds,  Lk.  2  :  17. 
Why  announce  his  birth  to  them  ?  1.  That  attention 
might  be  called  to  this  birth,  in  the  press  of  business. 
2.  That  witnesses,  simple,  competent,  sufficiently  numer- 
ous and  disinterested,  might  see  him.  3.  This  testimony 
must  not  be  accomplished  in  too  public  a  manner,  in  or- 
der not  to  foster  the  designs  of  Herod.  4.  The  attesta- 
tion is  miraculous,  by  angels.  5.  New  connection  is 
made  with  O.  T.  hist,  and  types.  These  shepherds  were 
feeding  their  flocks  on  the  same  hills  where  D.,  their 
father,  had  fed  his.  Christ,  the  new-born  king,  is  typi- 
fied, who  should  feed  his  flocks  like  a  sheperd. 

Lange  finely  heads  this  as  "  The  first  Gospel  upon 
Earth."  The  sign  (Lk.  2:  12)  is  not  supernatural,  but 
sufficiently  accurate,  for  among  the  children  born  that 
night  in  Beth.,  probably  not  more  than  one  would  have 
been  in  a  manger.  3  ways  of  reading  the  doxology  : 
{a)  Glory  to  God  in  the  highest,  and  on  earth  peace,  good- 
will toward  men. 
{b)  "  "  "  in  (among)  the  highest,  and  on  earth 
peace^  good-will  toward  men. 


Zl^^   .<Ua,^^/-/-^^Gm^    of   'y\yCLAAjaMyt'~\.  -^,-4/  yuUiy^ayiJt^a,/As^  j  yi^  ■^Miyto^'^ 


S^  T^  iO^j-^- 


38 

(c)  Glory    to   God  in  the  highest  and  on  Eartli,  peace 
among  men  of  His  good-wilL 

Here  we  meet  with  one  of  the  most  imp.  readings 
which  materially  affect  the  sense.  The  altered  reading, 
among  the  men  of  His  good-will  is  equivalent  to  the  elect  i^eo- 
ple.  Valcknaer  :  "men  with  whom  God  is  pleased.'  Thus 
we  have  the  truth  that  sc/rji^r^  was  given  to  Jews  that 
through  them  it  might  be  a  joy  -ai^vc  zlo  Iuau.  Some  con- 
trast ayyzhn  and  di^docozot.  The  latter  come  in,  after  the 
former  had  completed  their  mission.  Argued  :  that  the 
publicity  of  this  event  ought  to  have  prevented  subse- 
quent unbelief.  Ans.  Lk.  16  :  31.  Nataralistic  \.h.eov\^t.9.^ 
to  get  rid  of  the  supernatural,  say  that  the  Shepherds 
were  aware  of  the  condition  of  Mary  ;  ,they  saw  a  bright 
light  in  the  heavens,  and  mistook  it  for  the  glory  of  God. 
Mythical  theorists  (more  naturally)  :  All  this  was  looked 
for  bee.  of  prophecy,  which  required  the  scene  at  Beth. 
Wherefore,  subsequent  writers  embellish  it  with  honor 
given  to  Christ.  The  Shepherds  were  related  to  David, 
and  therefore  they  were  made  use  of  more  than  other 
men.     Strauss  rejects  the  whole  thing. 

§9.  Circumcision  and  Presentation  in  the  leniplc.  The 
chronological  order  of  events  here  is  called  in  question. 
By  law,  circumcision  was  on  the  eighth  day,  and  presen- 
tation on  the  fortieth  day.  Now,  where  and  when  can 
be  inserted  "  the  adoration  of  the  Magi"  and  "  Flight  to 
Egypt  ?"  1.  Tradition  and  ecclesiastical  observance 
have  placed  them  before  the  presentation,  Obj.  :  Tra- 
dition not  old  enough.  2.  Matt.  2:  1  seems  to  imply 
that  the  adoration  soon  followed  the  birth.  But  if  the 
argument  proves  anything,  it  proves  that  it  was  on  night 
of'birth.  3.  HerodVas  ignorant  of  the  birth  until  the 
arrival  of  the  Magi  ;  but  "if  presentation  had  occurred, 
he  would  have  heard  of  it.  This  is  merely  gratuitous. 
He  might  have  heard  and  paid  no  attention  to  it.  The 
visit  of  the  Magi  awakened  his  suspicions,  as  they  came 
trom  distant  realms. 

Obj.  :  (1).  Time  inadequate.  Forty  days  required 
between  birth  and  purification.  This  could  not  compre- 
hend the  coming  of  the  Magi  and  flight  to  Egypt.  (2). 
Presentation  could  not  have  occurred  subsequent  to  the 
slaughter  of  the  Innocents.  Even  after  Herod's  death, 
when  Joseph  heard  that  Archelaus  was  in  power,  he  was 


34 

afraid  to  return.  Matt.  2:  22-28.  (a)  Hengstenbiirggets 
over  this  by  translating  "  he  went  there  with  fear." 
(6)  Ritual  view  puts  presentation  between  Magi's  visit 
and  flight.  But  1,  it  is  expressly  stated  that  the  visit  of 
Magi  caused  alarm  in  Jerusalem,  and  excited  Herod's 
fears.  2.  It  separates  between  Magi's  visit  and  flight, 
which  Matthew  connects  as  cause  and  effect.  Hence, 
both  prove  fatal  to  the  Ritualistic  theory.  3.  Robinson, 
IScliafl",  itc,  j'Ut  presentation  flrst.  .Obj.:  I^uke  gives  no 
return  to  Bethlehem,  and  implies  the  return  to  Xazareth 
to  be  immediately  after  presentation. 

Alls. :  It  is  not  a  part  of  Luke's  plan.  He  only  main- 
tains the  (consistency  of  his  owfi  narrative.  From  Beth- 
lehem to  Jerusalem  only  two  hours  journey,  and  thei'e- 
fore  unimportant  to  mention.  Negative  critics  hold  these 
two  lines  are  contradictions,  but  harmonists  that  each 
narrative  flows  on  in  its  course,  yet  consistent,  and  form- 
ing one  beautiful  whole. 

Prcsentaiioa  in  the.  Temple. — The  design  is  four-fold.  1. 
Showed  obedience  to  the  law  by  puriflcation  of  the  Vir- 
gin and  redem[ttion  of  flrst  born.  Obj.  :  Jesus  was  a 
priest,  and  tlierefore  it  was  illegal.  Argument  of  no 
force,  as  Jesus  was  not  a  Levite  to  wdiom  the  law  was 
prescribed.  Hence  Jesus  rendered  no  formal  service  as 
redemption  of  flrst-born  was  necessaiy.  2,  A  new  op- 
portunity for  testimony  to  inspiration,  given  by  Simeon 
and  Anna.  8.  Jt  spread  the  report  of  his  birth.  4.  Re- 
cognition of  the  spiritual  Israel.  It  is  worthy  of  notice 
here,  that  tliese  exam[)les  and  testimonies  are  scattered 
the  country  over.  Zacliariah  and  Elizabeth  in  the  south, 
Joseph  and  Mary  in  the  north,  Simeon  and  Anna  at  the 
metropolis.  It  is  objected  on  the  ground  of  discrepancy 
that  ver.  24  gives  the  sacriflite  as  due  from  the  mother, 
while  ver.  27  does  not  mention  the  redemption-money 
for  the  child.  Every  woman  at  purification  presented  a 
lamb  and  a  dove  for  sacrifice,  but  in  ease  of  poverty,  an 
additional  dove  was  substituted  for  the  lamb.  The  latter 
having  been  nuule  by  Mary,  betrays  indigence.  Ver.  22 
makes  al)Tw>  refer  to  wlionir  Not  Joseph.  But  there  is 
no  difliculty  in  applyinij  xadainfffiou  to  Jesus,  because  He 
represented  His  people.  It  is  not  positively  stated  that 
Simeon  was  tar  advanced  in  j'ears.  Some  suppose  he 
was  Rabbin  Simeon.     Some  interesting  points  just  here. 


rH 


'Mn-i   V^^-CU,  CW^->,^oi^i  Aw-L-o^  -tUrC 


35 

1.  The  fact  of  inspiration  shown  in  th«  promise  that 
he  should  see  the  Messiah.     2.  The  clear  recognition  in 
Simeon's  words  of  the  fact  announced  in  the  aiio-elic  dox- 
ology  of  the  universal   application   of  our  Lord's  work 
3.  Prophecy  veritied.     4.  His  sutJerings  foretold.     These 
four  points  teach  three  things:     (1)':  Rejection   by  the    ^i'/z.-^ 
Jews.     (2).  Calling  of  the  Gentiles.     (3).  His  sacrificial       "     ^''^ 
cliaracter.     We  also  infer  that  tribal  relations  were  not   ^/.f 
all  lost,  as  Anna  is  mentioned  as  beloiiging  to  the  tribe  -^ ^'*^'^*^ '^ • ' 
of  Aser.     Fasting  and  prayer  to  be  understood  literally 
and  not  of  an  ascetic   order,  as  they  simply  mean  Anna 
led  a  religions   life.     The  sceptical  objections  here  are 
larae.     The  Mythists  assert  that  the  motive  for  miracles 
in  tlie  narrative  was  a  desire  to  exalt  Christ  on  the  part 
of  later  writers.     This  alone  they  say  was  the   cause  lor 
the  multi])licity  of  Miracles. 

UO.  Adoration  of  flir  MiHii.  Matt.  2:1-12.  According 
to  the  most  approved  plan,  this  belongs  to  verses  38-39 
of  Lk.  2.  Its  signification  is  the  counterpart  of  the  last. 
The  time  after  presentation  was  brief,  as  Herod's  death 
soon  followed.  The  adoration  of  the  Magi  represents 
His  acknowledgment  by  the  Gentiles.  They  could  not 
have  been  dews.  Their  question  was,  where  is  He  who 
is  born  King  of  the  Jews  ?  The  salient  change  in  the 
church  at  this  time  was  the  calling  of  the  Gentiles.  X.  T. 
dispensation  is  of  grace,  hence  universal,  and  not  an  ac- 
cident of  its  condition,  but  an  inward  change  in  the 
essential  character  of  the  dispensation.  O.  T.  prepara- 
tory and  honored  in  its  being  superseded.  Care  was 
taken  that  He  did  honor  to  the  law— the  O.  T.  Like- 
wise in  the  fulfillment  of  prophec}^  and  calling  of  the  ^^ 
Gentiles.  Christ  was  apprehended  by  the  Magi  as  the 
kiug^  and  they  tendered  Him  royal  gifts.  This  custom 
common  to  the  East.  Divinely  guided,  hence  it  is  nat- 
ural to  infer  that  they  cherished  a  real  faith  in  the  Son 
of  God,  but  not  so  clear  as  was  possible  after  the  resur- 
rection.    By  some  it  is  thought  the  gifts  were  significant. 

1.  Gold  significant  of   royalty,  authority,  sovereignty. 

2.  Frankincense  of  prayer  and  intercession,  thus  recog- 
nizing him  as  the  hearer  and  answerer  of  supplication. 

3.  Myrrh,  being  a  favorite  anodyne  and  antiseptic,  had 
reference  to  his  sufferings  and  resurrection  ;  hence  the 
incorruptibility  of  his  nature;  and   the  promise  that  his 


86 

body  should  not  see  corruption.  The  mother  accepted 
the  gifts  as  His  due.  Tradition  has  greatly  embellished 
this  event.  The  three  donors  represent  three  different 
races,  viz  :  Shem,  Ham,  and  Japheth.  In  pictures,  one 
is  represented  as  a  negro.  But  more  important  than  these 
traditionary  views  we  shall  observe  1.  The  Magi,  called 
lidyoc  6.710  duazo?Mv.  Originall}',  a  tribe  of  Medes  set  apart 
for  priests,  same  as  the  Levites  among  the  Jews.  They 
embodied  the  learning  of  the  people.  Their  knowledge 
consisted  principally  of  astrology.  2.  The  country  of 
their  abode  the  text  leaves  uncertain.  Three  have  been 
given,  Arabia,  Mesopotamia,  Persia.  The  last  best. 
Notice  the  change  from  auazohou  to  avazoArj.  Both  forms 
are  used  as  definite  geographical  expressions.  Auazo?uou 
is  the  far-east  Persia.  Avazo)xj,  east  Bal)ylonia.  Observe 
the  representatives  of  the  race  are  chosen  from  the  cradle 
of  the  race.  The  Greeks  and  Romans  were  too  impure 
and  familiar  with  the  Jews,  and  treated  them  with  con- 
t-empt.  Barbarians  were  too  ignorant.  The  east  chosen 
because  the  cradle  of  Science.  The  writings  of  Zoroaster 
come  nearer  to  the  Holy  Scriptures  than  any  others.  3. 
What  brought  the  Magi  ?  Phenomena  natural  or  super- 
natural? Prevailing  belief,  natural.  To  its  being  mi- 
raculous it  is  objected  :  {a)  Nowhere  taught  in  the  text. 
{b)  Magi  saw  the  star  in  the  East.  If  seen  in  the  East  it 
could  not  go  before  them.  To  remove  this  difficulty  read 
ver.  2  :  "  while  we  were  in  the  East  &c."  (c)  They  were 
not  led  to  X.  but  came  to  Him.  Not  guided  to  Bethlehem 
until  they  asked  for  the  child.  When  directed  again  to 
Bm.  they  saw  the  starthe  second  time.  Popular  tradition 
is  that  the  star  led  them.  Ans.  :  Kepler  the  first  to  sug- 
gest the  natural  explanation  in  1604.  (See  Andrews 
pp.  9-10).  He  observed  in  that  year  a  conjunction  of" 
Jupiter  and  Saturn,  in  Pisces,  in  Dec.  1603.  Mars  w^as 
added  in  the  following  spring,  and  a  new  star  of  surpass- 
ing brilliancy  appeared  in  the  autumn  of  1604,  In  747 
A.  U.  C.  there  werq  three  such  conjunctions  of  Jupiter 
and  Saturn,  and  M-ars  was  added  in  748  A.  U.  C.  Both 
of  these  conjunctions  have  been  supposed  to  be  the  star 
of  the  Magi.  Kabbi  Abarbanel  states  that  the  same  thing 
occurred  at  the  birth  of  Moses,  and  also  in  1463,  w^hich 
led  him  to  look  for  the  birth  of  the  Messiah  in  his  own 
day.     Wieseler  says  it  was  a  new  star  in  749  and  750, 


37 

and  finds  it  recorded  in  the  Chinese  annals.  This  cUishes 
with  Zunipt,  whose  theory  is  determined  by  the  date  that 
Cyreuius  was  governor  of  Syria,  as  previously  stated. 
Ques :  How  is  this  star  to  be  associated  with  X's  birth  ? 
Ans :  1.  They  knew  this  was  the  part  of  the  heavens 
which  belonged  to  Judea.  2.  A  prevailing  expectation 
at  the  tinie  for  a  Deliverer,  who  should  appear  in  Judea. 
(Vide  Suetonius  and  Tacitus).  3.  Collateral  traditions 
from  common  sources  of  knowledge.  Chinese  sages,  33 
years  later,  coming  west,  inquired  for  the  long  expected 
and  common  Saviour.  4.  These  were  combined  with 
Jewish  expectations.  Jews  were  scattered  widely  over 
the  world,  who  spread  knowledge  of  God  and  Messianic 
predictions.  David  and  Daniel  had  prophesied  of  Him. 
In  Num.  24  :  17  and  Is.  60  :  3,  he  is  spoken  of  under  the 
figure  of  a  star.  Mary  applies  N.  24  :  17  to  X.  Balaam's 
words  may  have  been  handed  down  outside  of  the 
church.  These  passages  may  have  given  shape  to  as- 
tronomical expectations  relative  to  X.  Hence  the  Magi 
were  naturally  led  to  observe  heavenly  phenomena. 
Hengstenberg  objects.  1.  o.(TTf]p  is  applicalDle  to  only 
one  bod}',  and  aazpov  to  a  constellation.  The  former  is 
true,  but  the  use  of  the  latter  is  wide.  2.  Kepler  has 
been  reviewed  by  Pritchard.  He  says  conjunction  in  no 
case  was  perfect.  The  stars  ahvays  separated  by  two 
diameters  of  the  moon  between.  Ans:  Still,  the  phe- 
nomenon was  very  remarkable  as  well  as  the  coincidence 
of  his  calculations".  The  two  planets  came  together  about 
three  hours  and  a  half  before  sunrise,  and  hence  in  the 
East,  The  first  appearance  would  be  seen  in  the  East 
May  20,  747,  just"before  sunrise.  The  second  in  Nov., 
five  months  later  in  the  south,  at  8  P.  M. :  hence  star  ap- 
peared toward  Bm,  The  former  indicated  the  birth, 
the  latter  the  way  to  Bm.  This  involves  those  who  claim 
747  in  all  the  chronological  difficulty  to  which  we  have 
referred.  Accordingly,  the  birth  of  X.  is  put  three  years 
earlier,  and  makes  Him  33  years  at  Baptism.  Therefore 
the  Magi  did  not  probably  set  out  at  the  first  appearance, 
but  delayed  some  time.  "^Again,  the  term  of  Quirinus 
was  not  earlier  than  750,  whereas  this  makes  nativity 
three  years  before.  But  the  taxing  might  have  been  four 
years  earlier  than  750.  The  only  alternative  for  this 
naturalistic  explanation  is  to  adopt  the  theory  of  a  new 


5tar,  natnra!  or  miracnloiis,  3.  Objections:  Why  should 
Herod  slaughter  3  year  old  children  ?  As  the  first  star 
\vas  ouly  five  months  before,  tlierefbre  Ave  must  agree 
tliat  stai'  at  Bm.  was  a  new  star  or  a  miraculous  one. 
Milton  supposes  a  leading  of  the  rays;  Dr.  Pritchard  tlie 
going  and  standing  of  the  star  was  in  consequence  of  the 
Magi's  journeying  and  arrival:  Dr.  Alexander  that  the 
words  mean  they  saw  the  star  again  on  the  road  to  Bm. 
and  thus  <'onfirmed  their  hopes,  and  hence  it  was  a  star 
seeming  to  go  before  theni.  4.  God  would  not  usetlieir 
false  notions  of  astrology  for  such  an  end.  Strauss  asks, 
Is  astrology  wrong  elsewhere  but  right  in  this  case? 
Ans  :  God  employs  men  as  they  are,  bringing  good  out 
of  evil.  Also,  astrology  was  then  considered  as  associa- 
ted with  all  true  astronomy.  It  embodied  true  science. 
Astrology  and  Alchemy  embraced  all  that  was  known  of 
science.  There  are  perplexing  difKculties  either  way. 
Still,  the  astrological  phenomena  must  have  given  cor- 
roboration to  the  expectations  for  the  Messiah.  Observ- 
ed at  the  time  of  birth,  and  hence  they  furnish  collateral 
evidence  to  the  time  of  the  nativity. 

Mythists  assert  the  whole  to  be  a  myth.  Arabian  mer- 
chants befriended  the  parents  in  their  poverty.  The  magi 
were  fixed  upon,  as  they  were  astronomers;  and  star,  be- 
cause of  O.T.  passages  referring  to  a  great  light,  and 
which  were  literally  understood.  The  gifts  referred  to 
Isaiah  60  :  6. 

As  to  the  general  effect,  Herod  and  the  city  were  trou- 
bled. The  wise  rnea  of  the  Jews  called  and  questioned, 
and  replied,  "Christ  was  to  be  born  in  Bm."  Mic.  5  :  2. 
Note  the  difference  in  reading  between  Micah  and  Matt. 
A  striking  illustration  of  two  opposites  meaning  the 
same  thing.  Warned  of  God  in  a  dream,  the  magi 
avoided  Herod  and  returned  home  another  way. 

§11.  FHiihi  into  J'J(/)/pf— Iff  rod's  Oru(ltii—-The.  Betxrn.— 
Matt.  2:  13-23.  Besides  saving  the  child's  life,  it  sym- 
bolically embodies  the  great  truth  that  the  Messiah  was 
to  suffer,  llitberto  all  peaceful.  Except  poverty  and 
humility,  notliing  as  yet  indicated  His  suffering.  The 
design  of  the  flight  is  five-fold.  1.  To  introduce  the  suf- 
fering element.  2.  Christ's  kingly  office  set  forth. 
Princely  honors  bestowed.  3.  O.  and  N.  T.  typical 
relations  established.     Egypt  was   a  refuge,  being  near 


39 

and  under  Roman  power.  Moses  was  saved  there,  where 
also  was  the  transitional  state  of  the  church  from  the 
ft^niily  to  the  nation.  Church  came  up  out  of  Egypt 
when  preserved.  Xow  in  danger  church  repairs  there 
again.  Christ  is  saved.  4.  In'^Egypt,  Hos.  11 :  1  fulfil- 
led. ObJ'n  :  misapplication.  Ans:  The  calling  of  Israel 
/roni  Egypt  bears  a  typical  relation  to  Christ"  5.  New 
evidence  of  miraculous  care  observed  for  the  child.  Jo- 
seph conspicuous,  as  evidence  for  nuraculous  c(uiception, 
and  preservation.     Hence  he  is  too  much  underrated. 

Massacre  of  the  Luioeenls.  Objections:  1.  Herod  .de- 
feated his  purpose  by  inquiring  of  the  Magi.  Too  cun- 
ning for  this.  Better  accomplished  by  secret  messenger, 
&c.  2.  Silence  of  contemporaneous  history.  Could  such 
cruelty  escape  notice  ?  No,  say  negative  critics.  Jose- 
phus  and  Fioman  liistorians  make  no  record  of  it.  Ans  : 
Whatever  was  unpleasant  to  Roman  ears  Josephus  was 
careful  to  omit.  Roman  historiajis  did  not  mention  it 
because  they  had  no  sympathy  with  Jewish  hist'y.  Again, 
this  was  only  as  a  drop  in  the  bucket  as  compared  with 
Herod's  cruelties.  Through  jealousy  he  killed  his  wife 
and  sotis.  When  dying  he  issued  orders  to  destroy  his 
nobles,  that  there  might  be  weeping  at  his  death. 

The  wise  men  mocked  Herod.  Pride,  ambition  and 
fear  caused  him  to  kill  all  the  male  children,  ryjc  -tuoa^, 
Xo  mention  of  secrecy.  From  two  years  old  and  under 
cannot  be  limited  to  those  beginning  their  second  year, 
nor  can  it  be  said  Christ  was  two  years  old.  If  the  child 
had  just  been  seen  by  the  Magi,  why  those  two  yrs.  old 
and  under?  Herod  would  liave  killed  enough  children 
without  extending  his  order  to  those  two  years  old.  Ans. 
Prophecy  was  thus  fullilled,  Jer.  31:  15.  Objected  again 
that  the  prophecy  is  misapplied.  Rachel  is  poetically 
represented  as  rising  from  the  grave,  owing  to  the  de- 
portation of  captives  at  Ramah,  the  descendants  of  Jos. 
and  Benj.  Here  as  rising  to  weep  for  the  massacre  of  the 
innocents  at  Bm.  Ans:  Typical  connectiou  between 
the  two  events.  As  to  the  number  of  children  slaugh- 
tered, sceptics  exaggerate.  Voltaire  says  14,000.  Anti- 
quarians estimate"  the  population  by  aieasurement  of 
space.  This  necessarily  is  liable  to  mislead.  Variously 
estimated  about  90,  10,'^or  l±     Smallest  most  probable. 

Mvthists,  &c.,  say  all  heroic  persons  passed  through 


40 

dangers duriiisjinfiincy  and  childhood.  Romnhis,  Remus, 
Cyrus,  &o.  Hence  the  eventful  infancy  of  Christ,  or,  it 
was  a  pure  invention  to  connect  it  with  Moses  and  Heb'ws 
in  Egypt.  The  place  of  sojourn  is  unknown.  Traditions 
clash.  Some,  near  Heliopolis;  others,  at  Memphis. 
Nor  is  the  duration  of  the  sojourn  fully  known.  Varies 
as  the  date  of  birth  by  different  critics.  The  return  was 
soon  after  Herod's  death,  as  Jos.  had  not  heard  of  his 
successor.  We  may  Tiote  Math.'s  agreement  with  con- 
temporaneous hist.  Period  of  intricate  changes,  yet  no 
mistake  is  made.  Herod's  territory  divided  into  three 
parts.  Herod  Antipas,  tetrarch  over  Galilee  and  Berea  ; 
Archelaus ;  Judea,  Idumea  anci  Samaria.  Herod  had 
appointed  Archelaus  king,  but  Augustus  allowed  him  the 
title  of  Ethnarch.  Philip  was  allotted  Trachonitis,  Au- 
ranites.  The  gospel  narrative  moves  through  all  these 
without  a  single  blunder. 

It  was  Joseph's  intention  to  return  to  Bm.  Warned 
in  a  dream  to  return  again  to  Nazareth.  Prophecy  ful- 
filled, Jud.  13 :  5.  That  Nazareth  is  never  mentioned  in 
O.  T.  is  based  partly  on  the  etymology  of  the  word. 
Supposed  to  be  from  a  Heb.  word  meaning  a  hoig  ;  others 
from  a  word  signifying  a  crown.  Allusion  to  Is.  11 :  1 
compared  with  53  :  3.  Messiah  to  be  a  twig  from  the 
prostrate  stem  of  Jesse,  i.  e.,  of  humble  origin.  There 
is  reference  to  the  reputation  of  the  town.  "  Can  any 
good  come  out  of  Nazareth  ?"  Christ  fulfilled  prophecy 
by  living  there.  The  return  and  settlement  at  Nazareth 
close. the  period  of  infancy. 
{^' '  The  peculiarities  of  this  first  subdivision  of  the  pre- 

paratory period  are  heightened  by  the  silence  that  fol- 
lowed. 1.  Matt,  and  Lk.  combine  to  form  a  unit,  fitting 
like  a  lock  and  key.  2.  The  supernatural  and  historical 
elements  are  one.  If  miracles,  they  must  be  received  on 
historical  evidence.  Bleek  says  Christians  cannot  but 
expect  Christ's  entrance  into  the  world  accompanied  by 
peculiar  signs.  3.  The  attempt  to  discredit  is  based  on 
subjective  and  rationalistic  grounds,  i.  e.,  difficulty  to  be- 
lieve, varying  with  the  individual.  Critics  argue  in  circub. 
The  choice  is  between  Matt,  and  Strauss.  4.  The  histori- 
cal characteristics  already  justified  in  connecting  with 
O.  T.  The  typical  and  symbolical  exhibited,  and  facts  im- 
.ply  and  embody  truths,  which  were  brought  out. 


^     ^^-t^K^xJ^^iJ^     ^\jU^<^nrcU    err-   ^-^iJ^J^-y 


'H^i-u^/l  ^^^-^-^^-^^<^t-i^W^..e,^ 


41 

Second  Subdicision  of  Preparatory  Period. — Its  limits 
comprise  the  return  and  end  ofSOyears  of  quiet  lifeat  Naz- 
areth, or  settlement  at  Nazareth  to  commencement  of 
ministry.  Profound  silence.  No  uninsj3ired  writer  could 
refrain  from  his  own  interpolations.  Hence  the  contrast 
between  apocrypha  and  N.  T.  Desis^n  of  the  silence. 
1.  Essential  to  have  a  full  account  of  Christ's  origin,  his 
ministry,  public  work  and  sacrifice.  To  this  the  "gospels 
correspond.  2.  Period  of  growth,  not  work.  Just 
enough  presented  to  maintain  hist,  connection.  Silence 
a  check  upon  those  who  would  dwell  on  unimportant 
truths.  More  would  have  been  gratification  of  curiosity 
to  which  sacred  historians  never  descend.  Otherwise  the 
narrative  would  be  impaired.  3.  Such  given  as  adds  to 
our  ideas  of  Christ.  Two  extremes  to  be  avoided :  [a) 
That  Christ  learned  nothing  in  a  natural  way,  but  all 
supernatural,  even  to  reading  and  writing.  This  view 
unwarranted  by  facts,  and  unnecessary  to  his  divinity. 
(6)  Naturalistic.  This  exalts  his  mental  powers  to  the 
exclusion  of  the  divine.  This  untrue,  as  the  people 
wondered  at  his  wisdom,  having  never  learned.  Narra- 
tive says  "  he  taught  not  as  one  taught  by  the  scribes." 
He  probably  lived  and  learned  as  other  boys.  Supposed 
to  have  learned  his  father's  trade.  Mk.  6:3;  13  :  55. 
See  Dr.  Alexander. 

Gospel  Lessons. — 1.  Early  life  uneventful.  2.  Growth, 
not  action.  Grew  in  wisdom  and  stature.  3.  He  grew 
in  favor  with  unbelieving  Galileans,  who  knew  him  best. 
His  brethren  the  most  difficult  to  persuade,  and  his 
tow^nsmen  sought  twice  to  kill  him.  They  were  scan- 
dalized by  his  assuming  superiority.  There  was  no  un- 
natural and  repulsive  precocity  in  him.  He  possessed  a 
perfect  human  nature.  Early  Fathers  say  he  had  no 
personal  beauty,  based  on  Is.  53  :  2.  Later  view  founded 
on  Ps.  45.     4.  The  most  important  is  the  following: 

§12.  Visit  to  the  Passover.— Lk.  2:  41-52.  This  single 
paragraph  presents  the  fact  of  his  extraordinary  powers. 
Were  it  not  for  this,  there  would  be  room  for  the  asser- 
tion that  Christ  received  no  miraculous  gift  till  Baptism. 
The  event  marks  a  transition  in  his  consciousness.  The 
growing  boy,  full  of  heavenly  wisdom,  seeking  after 
knowledge,  kind  to  his  parents,  obedient  in  all  things. 
Olshausen  beautifully  says,  "  He  was  a  perfect  boy,  per- 


f  M^u/j 


42 

feet  man."  A  marked  ari'ival  of  fuller  consciousness  of 
Ills  mission  is  also  noticeable.  Impressed  with  his  desti- 
ny. In  analogy  with  human  experience.  Christ  had  a 
child  knowledge  of  himself.  Now  a  youth's  experience, 
then  the  sudden  mental  changes,  of  which  a  youth  is 
often  conscious.  Hence  glimpses  of  a  portentous  future. 
How  or  when  came  to  Jesus  the  consciousness  of  his 
Messiahship  we  are  not  told.  It  must  have  been  gradaal. 
A  sinless  being,  with  a  knowledge  of  sin,  yet  pure,  and 
conscious  of  difference  between  himself  and  others. 
Reading  the  law,  and  yet  having  perfect  love  to  God; 
the  types  and  prophecies  of  O.  T.  and  conscious  of  their 
fulfillment  in  himself.  A  gradual  conception  of  his  Mes- 
sianic character  must  have  been  wrought  in  him.  There 
are  evident  traces  however,  when  touching  upon  great 
truths,  of  modern  flashes  gleaming  in  upon  his  soul. 
This  is  one,  and  those  at  Baptism  and  on  Mt.  of  Trans. 

At  this  point  the  "  Lives  of  Christ"  open  themselves. 
The  authors  show  what  is  to  be  their  theory  of  the  per- 
son of  X.,  upon  which  they  explain  the  events  of  his  life. 
Rationalists  deny  or  explain  away  the  supernatural. 
Orthodox  writers  vary.  It  is  important  to  know  the 
author's  standpoint,  and  guard  against  misinterpretation 
of  forms  of  statement.  Ebrard,  Pressense,  and  Beecher 
explain  by  the  xev  oiocQ  theory,  which  is  a  self-limitation, 
or  self-emptying  of  the  Logos.  Divine  and  human  one 
and  the  same.  jSTot  two  natures,  but  one.  Distinction 
made  between  essential  nature  and  attributes.  X.  was 
God  essentially  and  potentially,  but  emptied  himself  of 
his  divine  contents.  A  babe  like  any  other  babe.  Void 
of  ideas,  was  a  bundle  of  germs  which  developed  through- 
out his  whole  life,  and  at  exaltation  his  Divinity  fully 
restored.  The  human  developed  into  the  Divine  ;  the 
Infinite  having  become  finite,  and  the  finite  growing  back 
into  the  Infinite.  This  theory  denies  the  real  humanity 
of  X.,  robs  him  of  liuman  sympathv.  X.  is  an  undeitied 
God. 

Others  lower  X's  humanity  by  separating  it  too  much 
from  his  divinity.  He  possessed  all  of  our  humanity, 
but  the  converse  is  not  true.  Hence  iiis  was  not  ours, 
but  his  own.  Yet  ours  touches  his.  For  this  view,  two 
reasons.  1.  He  was  sinless,  therefore  his  capacities  un- 
like ours.     We  do  not  know  what  sinless  humanity  is. 


M 


,^-(,4./T5>t'-lL^ 


oy  ^d.'t-cWAX.O-      ^  ^~PUjU 


k-^tt;^^*^'^ 


43 

2,  He  was  Divine,  and  two  natures  in  his  person,  there- 
fore above  us.  All  he  did  was  not  as  a  mere  man.  The 
human  influenced  by  the  divine,  and  hence  all  he  did  was 
done  by  God.  Illustration  :  A  Christian  is  exalted, 
owing  to  the  indwelling  of  the  H.  G.  So  X.,  though  a 
man,  is  exalted,  by  a  personal  union  with  the  Father  and 
H.  G.  Hence  as  a  man  is  infinitely  above  any  other 
man.  Paul  maintains  this  in  Hebrews,  as  the  ground  of 
the  infinite  value  of  his  sacrifice.  It  is  possible  to  so 
view  X.  as  to  conceive  of  him  as  sustaining  a  double  per- 
sonality. Most  of  the  "Lives  of  Christ"  are  based  on 
German  theories,  largely  tainted  with  this  speculation. 
This  is  growing  common  with  the  Baptists.  We  study 
him  not  merely  as  coinciding  with  our  views  of  his 
nature,  but  as  a  true  man,  developing  according  to  his 
nature,  acting  and  acted  upon. 

Jesus  went  up  to  the  temple  with  his  parents.  At  12 
Jewish  bo3's  became  "  sons  of  the  law,"  and  took  part  in 
the  feasts  &c.  The  country  was  safe  from  former  dan- 
gers. When  X  was  about  10,  Archelaus  was  banished 
to  Gaul.  The  government  in  the  hands  of  procurators, 
subordinate  to  governor  of  Syria,  and  thus  Galilee,  Sama- 
ria and  Judea  were  under  Roman  protection.  The 
parents  returned  from  Passover  but  Jesus  stayed  behind. 
They  had  proceeded  a  day's  journey  before  they  missed 
him,  thinking  he  was  with  his  kinsmen.  Failing  to  dis- 
cover his  whereabouts,  they  returned  to  the  city.  Found 
him  the  third  day  at  the  temple,  "  sitting  in  the  midst  of 
the  doctors."  "  Sitting"  does  not  necessarily  imply  equal- 
ity. Strauss  says  it  is  unnatural  that  a  boy  of  12  should 
be  instructing  men,  that  a  scholar  would  have  stood. 
*'  Hearing  and  asking"  imply  instructing.  Ans:  Xothiug 
in  the  narrative  inconsistent  with  an  intelligent  boy,  pure 
and  curious  for  knowledge.  Scholar  standing  was  not 
customary.  The  mother's  question  shows  their  mutual 
relation.  It  is  beautiful,  zsxuou,  u  iTtoivjaaQ  -fjiuv  bozioy, 
The  reply  is  variously  interpreted.  The  grammar  admits 
of  two.  Some  supply  ellipsis  locally—"  Why  did  you 
look  elsewhere,  did  you  not  know  I  would  be  in  my 
Father's  house  ?"  Better :  "  in  my  Father's  affairs,"  and 
thus  at  the  Temple,  as  the  article  roj'c  is  indefinite.  The 
first  recorded  words  of  X.,  and  an  acknowledgment  of 
God  as  his  Father.     Others  affirm  that  at  this  juncture 


44 

the  consciousness  of  his  destiny  became  more  real.  Pre- 
viously he  had  been  passive,  but  not  so  cow.  Best 
humanitarians  claim  the  words  are  expressive  of  penetra- 
ting insight  into  his  divine  mission.  We  may  remark 
that  the  incident  serves  to  enhance  our  interest  occasion- 
ed by  his  miraculous  birth.  The  parental  anxiety,  inquiry 
for  a  lost  child,  public  place  where  lie  was  found,  were 
all  calculated  to  arouse  thoughts  in  the  parent's  minds. 

Critical  Objections.  1.  Unnatural  that  his  mother  should 
lose  him.  Ans  :  He  was  old  enough  to  take  care  of  him- 
self Easily  lost  in  a  large  crowd.  2.  Unnatural  that  he 
should  cause  his  mother  so  great  anxiety,  and  then  give 
her  such  a  reply.  Ans :  Reply  not  rough,  but  a  gentle 
admonition  that  her  claims  were  subordinate  to  a  higher 
duty.  3.  If  the  circumstances  of  conception  were  true, 
the  mother  could  not  fail  to  comprehend  his  answer. 
Ans:  Mary  ma}'  not  have  fully  known  what  he  meant. 
12  years  could  have  glided  by  with  nothing  extraordina- 
ry. Hence  the  origin  of  the  Mythical  interpretation, 
based  on  Moses  and  Samuel.  From  the  narrative,  we 
learn  that  he  returned  to  Nazareth  and  was  subject  to 
his  parents. 

Joseph's  t/eat/t.  Supposed  to  have  died  soon  after  this. 
I^ot  mentioned  again.  Apocryphal  gospels  say  he  died 
when  Jesus  was  19.  Evidently  dead  at  the  time  of  cru- 
cifixion, as  Jesus  gave  his  mother  into  John's  care. 

Why  Nazareth  chosen  as  abode  ?  1.  To  fulfill  prophecy. 
2.  It  was  his  parents'  home.  3.  It  afforded  safety. 
Greater  danger  in  Jerusalem.  4.  Could  gain  more  influ- 
ence in  Galilee  than  in  Jerus.  under  the  Pharisaic  eye. 
5.  Isolated  from  Jewish  instruction,  he  is  supposed  to 
have  been  taught  of  God.  His  wisdom  given  by  inspira- 
tion. 6.  Reared  where  the  scenes  of  his  public  ministry- 
were  to  be  chiefly  laid.  Renan  :  "The  whole  Galilean 
ministry  was  within  sight  of  iiis  youthful  home."  Pres- 
ent Nazareth  consists  of  3000  inhabitants.  It  lies  in  a 
narrow  valley,  shut  in  between  two  rocks.  North  of  the 
Esdraelon  plain,  the  hill  looks  n.  e.  to  Ilermon.  There- 
fore the  view  was  familiar  to  him  when  looking  towards 
the  snow-capped  Herraon,  the  northernmost  point  of  X's 
work.  The  eastern  view  confronted  by  Tabor,  west 
by  Carmel  and  the  sea.  The  southern  by  Gilboa  and 
Samaria. 


-CatesS&is^ 


45 

§13.  Genealogies.  Mth.  1:  1-17;  Lk.  3  :  23-38.  The 
importance  of  these  lies  in  the  necessity  to  prove  X's 
Messianic  claims.  The  Jewish  genealogies  were  sacredlv 
kept  and  open  to  all.  Strauss  considers  them  fraudulent, 
and  that  they  involve  difficulties,  being  opposed  to  O.  T. 
Hence  no  proof  of  Christ's  Davidic  descent.  1.  On  the 
contrary,  the  royal  line  could  not  be  obscure.  People 
would  have  guarded  the  royal  seed  as  He  was  to  descend 
from  David.  This  was  the  promise.  If  Christ  had  been 
of  Davidic  descent,  he  would  have  been  hailed  as  Mes- 
siah. Ans  :  No  theocratic  rulers  on  account  of  sin.  2. 
Birth  at  Bra.  was  not  generally  believed,  nor  does  Jesus 
reply  to  this.  John?  :  42.  ANazarene,  and  so  he  passes  in 
Gospels  and  Acts.  Ans:  Nowhere  else  charged,  not  in 
Sanhedrim.  Were  the  charge  substantial,  it  would  have 
been  fatal  to  him.  He  was  not  ignorant  of  his  lineage, 
as  he  calls  himself  Daufc/'s  son.  Peter  at  Pentecost,  the 
Acts  and  Ejfistles  use  it.  Strauss  says  title  is  officially 
no  real  fact.  3.  No  concurrent  testimony,  no  reference 
to  Ebionites.  Ans:  Abundant  proof  without  the  gene- 
alogies. "  The  son  of"  or  "  begat "  not  limited  to  literal 
relationship  of  father  and  son.  This  true  when  line  runs 
out.  This  remark  clarities  Mth.'s  genealogy.  Remote 
ancestors  called  fathers  when  distinct  line  vanishes. 
Case :  Math,  says  "  Jacob  begat  Joseph."  Lk.,  "  Joseph 
was  the  sou  of  Heli."  No  literalness  here.  Again,  Mth. 
speaks  of  three  divisions  of  fourteen  genealogies  each. 
Difficulty.  But  the  most  obvious  way  to  remove  it  is  to 
count  David  twice.  Another  difficulty.  In  second  table 
four  kings  omitted  which  Chronicles  supplies,  thus  mak- 
ing eighteen  generations  instead  of  fourteen.  Therefore 
"so  all  the  generations"  must  mean  all  given  in  Mth. 
Charge  of  ignorance  absurd,  as  every  child  in  Judea 
knew'the  royal  list  better  than  we  do  the  Presidential, 
or  the  royal  line  of  Gt.  Britain.  But  why  fourteen  ?  1,  K>^ 
To  aid  memory.  2.  Symbolic  value  of  the  number  of 
letters,  which  were  fourteen.  David=14.  DS  V^  D*= 
14.  3.  P.ej-iods  chronologicjfUy  equal.  Untrue,  because 
the  first  period  is  twice  as  long  as  the  other  two.  4. 
These  periods  of  national  history.  This  the  raoat  satis- 
factory, i.  e.,  the  theocratic  descent.  What  names  omitted 
and  why  ?  Amaziah,  Joash  and  Ahaziah,  occurring  be- 
tween Joram  and   Ozias.     Some  say  because  they  de- 


46 

sceiicled  from  Jezebel,  and  others  because  the}'  were  mere 
ciphers.  Jehoiachim  omitted  as  captivity  began  in  his 
reign,  or  because  made  king  by  a  foreign  power.  Ob- 
jection to  Mth.  1 :  11.  Jechonias  had  no  brethren.  Ans: 
Brethren  may  mean  contemporaries.  Again  Jechonias 
had  no  chihlren,  hence  not  the  father  of  Salathiel. 
"  Write  the  man  childless."  Jer.  22  :  30.  Perhaps  this 
meant  he  should  lack  in  a  direct  line  of  successors  to  the 
throne.  All  these  little  difficulties  sufficiently  accounted 
for. 

Discrepancies  hehijccn  Mt.  and  Lk.  1.  Mth's  genealogy 
opens  the  narrative  and  was  probably  copied.  Lk's  is 
introduced  as  a  part  of  X's  personal  history.  2.  Mth. 
descends  while  Lk.  ascends.  3.  Math,  traces  the  royal 
line,  Lk.  the  natural  to  Adam.  4,  Lk.  fuller  than  Mth., 
giving  42  names  to  Mth's  28.  To  David  the  lists  agree. 
Difficulty  :  Between  Salmon  and  David  only  three  names 
occur  for  400  or  500  years.  Same  dif  in  Ruth,  and 
hence  another  instance  of  contradiction.  Ans :  Names 
omitted.     Said  that  Rahab  was  another  line  than  Jewish. 

Divergence  of  lineage  from  David  downward.  Mth.  fol- 
lows Solomon,  Lk.  ISTathan.  Two  hypotheses  :  1.  Both 
Mth.  and  Lk.  give  Joseph's  genealogy.  2.  Mth.  that  of 
Joseph  and  Lk.  Mary's.  (1)  current  before  Reformation, 
and  now  supported  by  manj'  of  the  best  critics,  viz. 
Alford,  Meyer,  &c.  (2)  held  by  Wieseler,  Ebrard,  Gres- 
well,  Alexander,  &c.  If  both  of  Joseph,  why  different? 
Ans:  One  through  kings  the  other  from  father  to  son. 
How  same  names  iu  two  different  lines,  e.  g.  Salathiel 
and  Zorobabel  ?  Ans  :  1.  Two  persons  with  same  name. 
2.  A  mere  coincidence.  Lines  together  in  Salathiel,  as 
direct  line  runs  out  and  Sal.  nearest  heir.  This  explains 
how  Jechonias  is  Salathiel's  father,  while  Lk.  makes 
Salathiel  son  of  Neri.  Main  obj  :  If  both  Joseph's, 
they  only  establish  X's  legal  right  to  the  throne,  but  no 
personal  descent.  Ans  :  Some  say  this  was  all  that  was 
required.  But  prophecy  does  not  allow  this  as  it  is  too 
definite.     Compare  2  Sam.^:  12  and  Acts  2:^  ;  13:  23. 

Hgjjothesis  of  Jos.  and  marij.  First  cousins  relieves 
the  objection.  Grandfather  of  both  one  and  the  same 
person:  Matthat  and  Matthan.  Matthan  had  two  sons. 
Heli  and  Jacob.  Hence  Jos.  and  Mary  were  first-cousins 
— of  Davidic  origin.     M.  had  sisters,  but  no  mention  of 


47 

brothers.  Tradition  says  M.  was  a  ward  of  Jos.  Thus  . 
a  partial  relief  afforded  if  genealogies  be  of  Jos.  They 
give  X's  right  to  the  throne'personally  and  officially.  Ob-  ~ 
jections  against  Lk's  giving  Mary's  :  1.  Female  line 
not  recorded.  Ans :  This  not  female,  but  genealogy  of 
woman  through  her  father,  and  thus  the  mak  line  of  M's 
ancestry.  2.  AI.  and  Eliz.  were  cousins,  and  Eliz.  of  un- 
royal line,  hence  M.  not  of  royal  line.  Ans  :  This  could 
be  on  mother's  side.  Intermarriage  allowed  among  the 
tribes.  3.  M's  name  not  mentioned  in  Lk's  genealogy, 
but  purports  that  of  Jos.  Ans:  This  not  easily  over- 
come, yet  not  absolutely  fatal  to  the  theory,  as  Lk.  says, 
"  who  was  supposed  to  be  the  son  of,"  &c.  4.  IsTo  other 
proof  that  M.  was  from  David.  Ans:  untrue — proved 
outside  of  genealogies  that  Christ  was  of  royal  line, 
which  confirms  the  probability  that  list  was  M's.  Lk.  1  : 
31-32.  This  prior  to  marriage  and  thus  necessary  that 
the  child  should  have  a  volantarr/  father.  This  the  light  ' 
in  which  she  could  understand  her  union  with  Jos.  if  she 
were  of  the  house  of  David.  Lk.  1 :  27.  David  may  re- 
fer to  the  principal  subject,  as  well  as  to  the  nearest  ante- 
cedent, i.  e.  Jos.  M.  went  to  Bm.  to  enrol  her  name  the  "-' 
same  as  Jos.  Lk.  2:4.  So  far  then  as  she  was  not  from 
Levitic  genealogy,  proofs  contrary.  All  texts  which 
prove  Christ  to  be  from  David  also  prove  the  same  for  M. 

This  subject  is  beset  with   difficulties.     Slight  mis-     ■' 
takes  destroy    certainty.      Genealogical    principles    un-    ^ 
known  to  us.     Much  has  been   cleared  up  which  critics    \     . 
deemed  insurmountable,  and  hence  reasonable  to  suppose 
that  coming  researches  will  remove  all  difficulties.     (See 
Smith's  Diet.,  Arthur  Harvey,  and  Dr.  Green  on  Colenso.) 

§14.  History  of  John  the  Baptist.  Mth.  3  :  1-13  ;  Mk. 
1:  1-8;  Lk.3/:  1-18.  Ministry  of  John  and  Tempt, 
introduced  Christ's  public  work.  Lk.  begins  by  formal 
transition  of  six  dates.  Mth.  and  Mk.  begin  with  preach- 
ing of  the  Baptist.  Prophecy  groups  the  Baptism  and 
entrance  upon  public  work.  Predictions  of  Malachi  are 
now  fulfilled.  John  began  to  preach  in  7f9,  a  Sabbatical 
year  by  best  chronology,  which  relieved  the  people  from 
labor  and  thus  aftbrcled  them  leisure  to  attend  John's  / 
ministry.  ''  The  word  of  the  Lord  came  to  John  in  the  ^^ 
wilderness,"  given  to  commence  work  directly,  and  hence  "" 
he  was  inspired  and  divinely  guided.     Rationalists  say 


f\  -\ 


''  ^   ?>  ^i^ 


48 


this  was  useless,  that  John  had  a  conviction  that  he  was 
a  man  of  God,  and,  seeing  the  condition  of  the  people, 
undertook  the  work  of  reformation.  But  the  scriptures 
show  he  was  under  divine  guidance. 

Design  of  Jolm's  Ministry. — 1.  Preparation  for  Christ. 
John  represented  O.  T.  economy,  and  was  the  last  and 
greatest  of  O.  T.  prophets,  being  an  embodiment  of  its 
spirit.  Hence  first  design  was  to  announce  New  Dispen- 
sation. Popular  belief  in  external  kingdom,  which  John 
proposed  to  remove.  2.  Preparation  of  people  by  repen- 
tance.  O.  T.  economy  educated  religious  life  without 
satisfying  it  and  the  people  to  expect  the  Messiah.  But 
the  majority  of  the  people  had  lost  the  spiritual  import 
of  prophetic  teaching.  The  Sadducees  were  sceptical 
and  Pharisees  self-righteous.  The  earnest  Essenes  had 
become  fanatics.  Hence  the  necessity  of  repentance  to 
restore  the  spiritual,  so  that  Christ  might  come  in  con- 
tact with  O.  T.  religion  in  revived  life  and  power,  and 
not  an  effete  religion.  3.  To  point  out  the  Messiah  in 
the  person  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  and  hand  over  to  Christ 
the  0.  T.  Dispensation.  "  This  was  He  of  whom,"  &c. 
4.  To  show  both  dispensations  united  in  Christ,  that  the 
old  yielded  to  him  and  withdrew. 

John  accomplished  his  designs,  first  Dy  preaching.  No 
new  doctrine,  but  a  return  to  the  power  and  spirit  of  the 
O.  T.  Its  character  was  severe,  denunciatory,  and  replete 
with  threatenings  of  wrath.  Abounded  in  O.  T.  figures. 
Points  out  specific  sins.  Calls  all  to  repentance,  but 
never  inculcates  asceticism,  yet  wants  them  to  observe 
the  purity  represented  by  it.  Points  to  Christ  as  the 
lamb  of  God,  advances  upon  Isaiah  by  pointing  to  the 
individual.  His  preaching  more  weighty  because  of  the 
purity  of  his  life.  Personally  fitted  to  revive  O.  T.  relig- 
ion, representing  the  formal  and  spiritual. 

Design  further'shown  by  the  rite  of  baptism.  The 
people  were  wont  to  connect  the  spiritual  with  the  sym.- 
bolical.  Baptism  something  new,  not  associated  with  the 
law.  Its  significance  was  the^washing  away  of  their  sins, 
a  restoration  of  the  spiritual.  John  charged  with  having 
learned  his  baptism  from  the  form  of  receiving  prose- 
lytes. Ans  :  As  an  initiatory  rite  of  Judaism  it  did  not 
assume  form  until  after  the  destruction  of  the  temple. 
He  received  it  from  the  washinirs  of  the  O.  T. 


%l^  A.<^r:Ub  (D  ^  ■  ^— ^-^^^^ 


49 

John's  relations  to  O.  T.  1.  By  birth,  being  of  priestl^^ 
origin.  2.  By  his  fulfiUraent  ofMalachi's  prophecy,  3  :  1, 
and  Isa.  40  :  3.  3.  By  the  j)Jace  he  frequented,  viz.,  the 
Desert  of  Judea,  or,  as  Lk.  says.  "  the  region  round  about 
Jordan,"  i.  e.  between  mountains,  lower  Jordan  and  the 
Dead  Sea.  Boundary  crossed  where  Israel  entered  Ca- 
naan. Symbolical  of  the  moral  and  religious  destitution 
of  the  people.  So  regarded  in  0.  T.  Hence  John  lived 
unlike  his  master,  who  sought  men  at  their  own  homes. 
He  must  be  found  in  the  wilderness.  His  personal  ap- 
pearance was  peculiar.  Dress  made  of  the  cheapest  and 
coarsest  material,  and  had  camel's  hair  which  is  shed 
yearly.  But  this  raiment  was  not  official,  only  assumed 
b}'  Elijah  and  John  to  symbolize  renouncement  of  ease 
and  luxury.  In  2  Kings  1  :  8  Elijah  called  a  "  hairy 
man."  Comp.  Zech.  13  :  4.  Hence  our  conclusion.  His 
food  was  locusts  and  wild  honey.  The  nearest  at  hand. 
All  these  things  were  fit  to  mark  him  as  a  representative 
of  0.  T,  dispensation. 

Was  JjQhn's  preaching  merely  negative  ?  Was  his 
repentance  a  saving  grace?  Did  baptism  cleanse  or 
simply  symbolize  ?  Rationalists  affirm  that  repentance 
meant  renouncing  of  sin  outwardly.  Some  orthodox 
writers  say  no  vitality  in  John's  work.  Answer  :  John 
taught  all  the  grace  and  power  of  O.  T.  Hence  real  re- 
pentance and  faith,  as  far  as  O.  T.  exhibited.  He  vindi- 
cated the  relation  between  O.  and  N.  T.  "I  baptize 
with,"  &c.  Further  said  baptism  was  a  mere  external 
ceremony  ;  others  make  the  contrast  between  John  and 
Christ,  "  I  baptize  in  dependence  upon  him  who,"  &c. 
Best :  ISTo  allusion  to  Christian  baptism  as  an  ordinance. 
Eminent  authorities  hold  this  view.  Christian  baptism 
not  yet  established.  Meaning  then,  "I  baptize  ceremo- 
nially with  efficacy."  Proposed  to  the  people's  faith — 
"  He  shall  pour  out  the  Spirit."  Thus  the  distinction  is 
_iii  degree  and  not  in  kind.  "  He  shall  .  .  .  with  tire  :" 
inieference  to  judgment  fire.  J^ext  clause,  "  chatiP,  &c." 
2.  Purifying  fire.  Drs.  Alexander  and  SchafiF.  Better  : 
Holy  Ghost,  and  therefore  zeal. 

The  popular  success  of  John  was  immense.  Yet  it 
was  not  a  national  success.  Jerusalem  emptied  itself  to 
the  banks  of  the  Jordan.  Judea,  Samaria  and  Galilee 
gathered  there.     Priests,  scribes,  lawyers  and  soldiers, 


50 

all  conditions  thronged  to  hear  him.  Yet,  success  not 
enduring,as  the  masses  only  received  him  formally.  His 
pmver  enhanced  by  his  peculiar  position,  as  a  voice  from 
the  desert.     Had  he  preached  in  Jerusalem   it  is  said  he 

IK 34'ould  have  been  powerless. 

y^  §1.5.  The  Baptism  of  Jesus.— Matt.  3:  13,  14;  Mk.  1 : 
9-11 ;  Lk.  3  :  21-23.  John  began  six  months  before. 
Clirisl  now  ready  to  be  brought  before  the  excited  crowd. 
It  was  the  design  of  Christ's  journey,  to  be  baptized. 
"  Too  j3a7rT(adr^vai"  which  denotes  purpose.  The  act 
anomalous,  that  the  less  should  bless  the  greater.  Matt. 
sa3'S  John  felt  this  and  tried  to  hinder  him.  Christ's 
words  peculiar:  sufter  now.  Two  things  implied  in 
them  :  1.  Something  was  to  be  allowed,  suffered,  al- 
though unusual.  2.  Seeininglj  temporary.  .  "  Suffer  it 
to  be  so  now."  It  is  Trftsnov,  seendy  to  complete  the  law's 
obligation,  what  is  right  in  a  specific  sense  for  the  fulfill- 
ment of  redemption.  The  xfifusal  of  John  shows  :  1. 
John  knew  and  believed  Jesus  to  be  the  Messiah.  2. 
\vas  subordinate,  did  as  Christ  commanded  him.  John 
baptized  on  Christ's  authority,  ^^hat  was  the  design  ? 
As  John's  baptism  involved  confession  oFsuTT'wTial'reTa- 
tion  did  Christ's  bear  to  this?  1.  Strauss  :  Confession  of 
sin  actual.  2.  Others,  it  implied  peccability,  and  hence 
Lange,  it  was  ceremonial  nncleanness.  Too  narrow  a 
view.  Schenkel  says  it  means  sympathy  with  others. 
^^-Txiia.view.  (1)  As  the  circumcision",  it  was  expressive 
oTlils^ssunjl^tion  of  hi.8jjeoplc'8  sins.  In__thejawls  yi^w 
he  was  a  sinner,  and  therefore  exhibited  the  necessity  of 
the  washing  away  of  the  sins  assum  ed.  As  Messiah  he 
was  sin-bearer.  Objection  to  last  :  Jesus  confounded 
with  the  people;  they  made  confession,  and  might  infer 
Christ  did  likewise  for  his  own  sins.  Guarded  :  Lest 
the}'  might  think  so,  the  divine  and  John's  testimony 
intervened.  (2)  The  design  is  again  shown  as  manifest- 
ing the  unity  of  the  two  dispensations.  The  chief  £e{ii:e- 
^eritatives  of  each  meet.  The  _0^.  T.  covenant  baptizes 
the  N.  T.  covenant.  Christ  publicly  gives  authority  to 
tne  work  of  John,  and  John  confesses  Christ  to  be 
superior  to  himself.  John  decreased,  Christ  increased. 
(3)  Baptism  served  to  inaugurate.. the  work  of  Christ. 
Afibrded  opportunity  to  God  to  recognize  his  Son.  This 
was  the  chief  import  of  the  baptism — cr^aou  jSa-naf^si^TO^, 


*^! 


51 

the  genitive  ubolute,  Lk.  3:  21.  Main  subjects  the  mi- 
raculous manifestations.  J^Lviue- attestations  necessary 
to  the  Messiah's  coming.  Wherefore  Christ's  arrival  de- 
layed till  a  great  concourse  had  flocked  to  John. 

(4)  A.t  Baptism  Christ  was  anointed  for  his  work  by 
the^  Spirit.  ISTot  only  formal,  but  full  of  vital  power. 
The  person  of  Christ  is  acted  upon.  Holy  Ghost  the 
agent  in  making  him  a  fit  place  for  the  indwelling  of  the 
Logos,  ^hn's  baptism  represented  cleansing  from  sin 
jiihiiili-  is  the  Spirit's  work.  In  the  case  of  Christ  the 
gift  confirmed  by  a  pign  of  the  Spirit's  descent.  The 
sign  and  descent  go  together.  Lk.  says  "  Jesus  was  pray- 
ing " — a  religious  act,  a  real  communication  of  the  Spirit 
to  Jesus.  After  baptism  is  the  temptation,  the  trying  of 
his  gift.  Cf>nj^.cti]rf^ :  Christ  now  for  the  first  time  re- 
alizes his  mission,  the  full  consciousness  of  his  sacrificial 
character.  _Ans.:  It  is  not  given  to  penetrate  so  deeply 
into  tbe  mind  of  Christ.  Certain  :  He  did  advance  in 
knowledge  of  ati  important  spiritual  crisis.  Always  full 
of  the  Spirit  sufficiently  for  his  purposes,  but  now  re- 
ceives it  immeasurably  for  his  public  ministry.  Had  it 
before  in  kind,  not  in  degree,  as  now  he  is  the  organ  of 
the  Holy  Ghost. 

■  |4.s  a  dm^e.  1.  Motion  of  the  dove  — Riding.  2. 
Quickness.  3.  Softness  of  the  dove.  But  these  are  in- 
coTTsistent  with  what  Lk.  says,  aw/iaTcxu)  el'dsc ;  hence  an 
appearance,  a  bodily  shape,  reaTdove  shape,  if  language 
means  anything.  Why  dove?  1.  Reference  to  O.  T. 
after  the  deluge.  ^.Brooding,  symbolical  of  new  crea- 
tion. 3.  Puriy.  4.  Symbol  of  sacrifice,  ceremonial 
associations.  (3}_aiixL4AXcombined  the  best.  Represented 
the~ whole  spirit  of  his  ministry.  1.  The  salvation  he 
preached  was  peaceful,  pure  and  lovely.  2.  iLsacrificial 
work.  3.  Productive  agency  of  Spirit  at  creation — 
brooding  dove.  Difficulty:  Mth.  3:  16— "the  heavens 
were  opened  aJzoj— to  him;"  Mk.  1:  10— "He  saw  the 
heavens,  &c.;"  John  1 :  32— "  I  saw,"  i.  e.,  John  Bap. 
Heiice.the  Baptist^j?i«s^  have  seen  the  Spirit  himself 
AnsTl.  'fhis  was  the  sign  by  which  he  could  recognize 
Christ.  Van  Oosterzee  considers  the  event  as  private, 
alid  Spirit  seen  only  by  John  and  Christ.  Obj  :  a.  Nat. 
inter,  deny  the  objective  reality  of  the  phenomena.  The 
vision  became  so  only  in  the  spiritual  world,  and  for  the 


52 

spiritualized,  h.  Discrepanc}'  in  the  several  accounts. 
Mth.  and  Mk.  say  "Jesus  saw;"  John — Baptist,."  saw  ;" 
while  Lk.  is  s^eneral — "  heaven  opened  and  Spirit  de- 
scended." 2.  Dramatic  representations,  in  the  reconcilia- 
tion between  O.  and  N.  T.  Voice  from  heaven  not  con- 
fined to  John  and  Jesus  alone,  "^y  belo.ved  Son," 
founded  on  2  Sam.  7:  12.  But  the  expression  does  not 
imply  that  he  became  Son  at  Baptism,  because  of  his 
eternal  relationship,  Ps.  2:  25,  42  and  "In  whom  J  am 
pleased  "  from  Is.  42.  Lange  says  aorist,  denoting  an 
eternal  act:  Alexander — a  definite  act.     The  last  best. 

In  this  expression  we  have  another  attestation  -to 
Christ's  Messiahship.  Tlligisthe  revelation  of  the  Trinity 
in  their  personal  agency  in  redemption.  The  first  in 
conception.  1  The  Father  at  baptism  declares  tbe.Soals 
Messiahship  and  the  Spirit  gives  grace  for  the  office. 
Minor  differences  in  form  of  expressions  made  a  subject 
of  cavil.  Mth:  "This  is  my,"  &c.,  while  Mk.  and  Lk. 
"  Thou  art,"  &c.  Some  think  both  are  proper  and  that 
there  were  two  utterances  from  heaven.  Words  were 
doubtless  in  Hebrew  or  Aramaic  and  here  in  an  inspired 
translation. 

Objections: — 1.  vShortness  of  time.  If  John  began  six 
months  before  there  was  not  time  enough  for  liis  success 
and  influence.  Ans :  John's  work  not  independent  but 
an  appendage  to  Christ's.  Results  accounted  for  by  the 
condition  and  great  state, of  expectancy  of  the  Jews. 
Strauss  makes  John  to  have  begun  when  about  20  years 
old,  long  before  Christ  came  to  him.  2.  Inconsistency 
between  John  and  Syn.  Syn.  say  John  knew  Jesus  whilst 
John  says  the  Baptist  did  not  know  him.  Again  John 
represents  the  Bap.  as  recognizing  Christ  as  the  Messiah 
from  the  first,  whereas  Syn.  affirm  that  he  sent  a  deputa- 
tion to  Jesus  from  prison,  saying,  "Art  thou  he  that 
should  come  ?"  Strauss  says  John's  gospel  belongs  to  a 
later  period,  that  John  would  not  have  said  the  "Lamb 
of  God  "  as  yet,  because  he  did  not  know  him  as  the  suf- 
fering Messiah.  Had  he  understood  him,  he  would  have 
baptized  him  and  given  up  his  work.  Ans  :  In  baptiz- 
ing, John  obeyed.  Strauss  again  :  If  the  miraculous 
conception  were  true,  Christ  had  no  need  of  the  Spirit  at 
this  time,  and  hence  the  event  is  a  myth.  Again  :  John 
an  Essene,  and  he  baptized  and  lived  as  the  Essence  did. 


53 

This  gives  a  historical  root  of  Christianity.  John  Bap- 
tist and  Essenisra  are  the  germs  of  Christianity.  John 
saw  the  necessity  of  a  moral  reformation,  and  if  the  peo- 
ple could  be  aroused,  the  Messiah  would  appear,  and 
hence  he  proclaimed  time  for  repentance  had  arrived. 
But  John  according  to  Strauss  never  acknowledged  Jesus 
as  Messiah.  Later,  Christ  is  baptized  and  indoctrinated 
into  Messianic  ideas.  Jesus  possessed  a  freer  and  clearer 
nature  than  John,  and  felt  a  lack  in  John's  negative 
method.  Hence  he  realized  all  those  graces  of  his  nature 
which  resulted  from  his  communion  with  God,  and  which 
were  unattainable  by  ascetic  methods.  They  looked  upon 
each  other  as  other  teachers  did.  Strauss  has  three 
mythical  stages  of  growth  :  1.  Church  idea  of  the  dignity 
of  Jesus  required  that  John  should  acknowledge  his 
Jj  Messiahship.  2.  Lk.'s  story  of  his  childhood.  S.John's 
account  of  a  clear  acknowledgment  of  Christ  by  the  Bap- 
,  tist  from  the  first.  Strauss'  canon  :  That  account  which  \ 
i^  tends  to  exalt  the  person  of  Christ  is  the  mythical  one.  ) 
TTiis  rules  out  John's  narrative  altogether  of  the  Baptist's 
recognition  of  Christ  from  the  first.  The  remainder  of 
John's  gospel  is  assumed. 

The  residuum  :  1.  The  relation  of  John  to  theEssenes, 
who  were  entirely  different.  Essenes  were  dualistic. 
Enjoined  asceticism  upon  all,  John  on  himself  2.  The 
ascetic  washings  were  not  baptisms  but  oft  repeated. 
John's,  once  tor  all.  8.  Strauss:  John  founded  a  sect. 
Ans :  Untrue,  but  called  the  whole  nation  to  repentance. 
Asceticism  taught  purity  consisted  in  mortification,  but 
receivers  of  John's  baptism  did  not  belong  to  any  such 
school.  4.  It  involves  a  long  continuation  of  Christ 
with  John  which  is  inadmissible.  Renan  :  Christ  more 
independent  than  John.  Before  Christ  came,  John  had 
formed  a  full  idea  of  reformation.  Likewise  Christ  had 
deferred  doing  good  until  he  had  seen  John  and  improved 
on  him.  Schenkel  saj'S  Christ  and  John  were  antagon- 
istic, Christ  at  first  sympathized  with  John,  but  after- 
wards regarded  his  influence  injurious.  Baptism  of  Christ 
only  a  transaction  in  his  soul,  which  he  conceived  to  be 
his  divine  mission,  and  hence  separated  from  John. 
Keim  holds  it  was  purely  humanitarian.  Relates  with 
reverence.  Christ  merely  a  man.  Outward  signs  unreal, 
but  baptism  a  consecration  to  a  work  which  John  had 
begun. 


54 

§16.  The  Temptation. — This  is  a  great  mystery,  as  it 
involves  the  doctrine  of  his  person.  Follows  baptism. 
Hengstenberg  holds  that  there  is  not  room  enough  in  40 
days  for  Bap.  and  Tempt. 

Designs:  1.  Typical.  The  heads  of  the  Messianic 
and  evil  kingdoms  brought  face  to  face.  Jesue,  full  of 
the  Spirit,  is  subjected  to  a  trial  of  strength  v^'ith  Satan, 
and  triumphs  in  the  complete  overthrow  of  his  adver- 
sary. Tempt,  recalls  the  history  of  redemption,  that  of 
a  conflict  between  the  kingdoms  of  light  and  darkness. 
"  Seed  of  the  woman  "  in  O.  T.  now  fulfilled.  Christ 
overcomes  for  his  people,  therefore,  in  connection  with 
baptism  and  before  his  life  work.  2.  Had  Messianic  ^- 
signs.  (a)  It  formed  a  part  of  Christ's  humiliatjon.  (/;) 
All  the  temptations  proposed  false  vie  wis  aftheMessiauJc 
work.  What  couldt)e  accomplished  only  through  suffer- 
ing, Christ  is  urged  to  do  at  once  by  unlawful  means.  3. 
Personal  reference  to  his  own  inward  experience.  Spends 
forty  days  in  prayer  and  fasting,  and  thus  by  outward 
means  he  w^as  prepared  for  his  work.  4.  ExemplarJ^^ 
It  shows  us  how  to  triumph,  by  prayer,  fasting  and 
the  Holy  Scriptures.  Christ's  practical  sermon  on  "  Re- 
sist the  devil  and  he  will  flee  from  you."  A  complete 
circle  of  temptations,  addressed  to  his  whole  nature,  so 
that  he  was  tempted  "  in  all  points  like  as  we." 

''Xi£d>_bx..tbe_,Spint.''  1.  His_ii:flLij_-niuid.  2.  The 
jievil.  3.  TheJIoly  Spirit.  Probably  the  last  who  led 
him  to_com]uest  over  Satan  in  the  wilderness.  The  des- 
ert  wasTbTcXuara'ntania'  mountain  near  Jericho.  "  Wjtj! 
A.yi^ld  beasts"  indicates  a  contrast  with  Adam's  situation. 
"^  "  Forty  days  fasting  "  has  O.  T,  associations.  Obj  :  Im- 
possible— too  long  a  time.  Ans  :  1.  Sirpernatural  p^wer. 
2.  Power  of  spirit  over  body  exalted  to  an  eminent  de- 
gree in  Christ.  3.  Abstinence Vnly  from  ordinary  nour- 
ishments. Lk.  4  :  2  ;  obx  icpayev,  thus  making  his  ab- 
stinence total.  Typical  import  in  the  number  forty. 
Moses  interceded  for  his  people  forty  days  ;  punishment 
consisted  of  forty  stripes  ;  Ninevites  fasted  forty  days, 
Ezekiel's  sin-bearing  forty  days,  and  purification  same 
length.  Hence  connected  with  confession  of  sin.  Mtb.^ 
ajid  Lk.  difier.  One  puts  tempt,  at  the  end  of  forty  days, 
the  other  says  he  was  tempted  all  the  time.  Most^natural^ 
^2iE.liiIlMiPliJtll9LLk£jw^£tei^^^ 


I  » 


55 

Character  of  the  Temptations.  I.  •'  If  thou  be  the 
Son  of  God  "  refers  to  God's  words  at  baptism.  Satan 
wants  proof.  "  Command  these^stones,  &c."  Stones 
numerous,  a.  Tempt,  to  gluttony.  Improbable,  because 
to  eat  bread  after  forty  days  fasting  would  iiot^be  glut- 
tony, h.  Xeiiipt.  to  distrust  Providence,  and  escape  suf- 
fering inseparable  from  the  character  and  mission  which 
die  assumed.  Not  exclusively  applicable  to  Christ.  His 
suiierings  were  representative.  Jews  looked  for  the  Mes- 
siah as  an  embodiment  of  plenty  to  supply  their  wants. 
(See  feeding  of  5000.)  -AV  here  fore  Christ,  was  teinptQd\ 
/to  do  by  one  stroke  wdiat  was  to  result  from  his  deatlij 
(and  univ^M'sal  law  of  love  annong  men.  Ans  :  Deut,  8  : 
3.  .Misinterpreted  as  referring  to  truth.  No  reference 
to  truth  but  to  manna,  as  truth  can  not  feed  the  body. 
Idea  :  Man  must  look  to  God  to  supply  all  his  w^ants, 
not__pnmarily  either  to  ordinary  or  extraordinary  means. 
II.  i)iiectl\- opposed  to  the  first.  A  presumptuous 
distrust  in  God.  As  if  Satan  said,  "  If  GocT  is  to  support 
you,  try  him."  Imitates  Christ  by  quoting  Ps.  91 :  11- 
12.  HTSfrrfcov  too  le/iou.  a.  Roof  of  Solomon's  porch. 
b.  Royal  porch,  c.  Double  pitch  of  roof  like  wings,  d. 
Wing,  as  we  use  it.  He  is  urged  to  forego  suffering. 
Again  Christ  takes  suffering  as  the  appointed  means  to 
fulfill  his  mission.  He  quotes  Deut.  6:  16.  Double 
meaning.  (1.)  TJioashouldst  not  tempt  me  who  am  your 
^yereign.     (2.)  I  should  tempt  God  by  so  doing. 

III.""  All  kingdoms."  Not  Palestine.  Did  Satan  own 
the  world  ?  Tlien  he  had  a  right  to  give.  Called  and  is 
the  prince  of  this  world.  The  world  and  Messiah  antag- 
onistic. Niit_dii'ist's.  kingdoms  now,  though  they  are 
on§.^av  to  be  Christ's.  Falseness  of  his  claim  lay  in 
regarding  his  power  as  superior  to  Christ's,  whereas  all 
his  power  is  allowed  him  for  the  good  of  the  church.  The 
supreme  sin  in  the  temptation  istheworshippingof  Satan. 
QuestionVh  ether  (a)  civil  homage  due  a  sovereign  or  (6) 
religious  worship  is  demanded  here.  The  two  are  insep- 
arable. To  acknowledge  Satan  would  be  to  receive  from 
him.  Tempt,  was  to  secularity  and  idolatry.  Jews  es- 
pecially exposed  to  this,  adapting  themselves  to  surround- 
ing nations  by  adopting  their  idols.  Satan  proposed  to\ 
give  the  kingdoms  of  the  world  immediately.  This  wasi 
just  the  object  of  Christ's  coming,  i.  e.,  to  establish  Mesy 


56 

sianic  sway  over  the  whole  earth.  The  people  expected 
this,  but  Christ  chose  tlie  spiritual  and  suffering  instead 
of  the  temporal.  The  humiliation  and  suff'eringare  seen 
to  be  his  choice  rather  than  his  accepting  the  proifer  of 
Satan.  From  Deut.  6  :  13,  "  Thou  shait,"  &c.  Signal 
honor  put  on  Deut.  (Especially  assailed  by  late  critics.) 
Thrice  qnotodby  Christ  under  the  usual  form  :  yvfpdTtzac. 

Remarks:  The  three  temptations  were  a  summary  of 
llis  life  sufferings.  His  triumph  a  token  of  final  triumph. 
Three  thiiigs.  1.  Rebellion  vs.  God.  2.  Denial  of 
Christ's  supreme  Divinity.  3.  Subjection  of  the  same  to 
Satan.  Not  vulgar  seductions  of  sense,  but  are  addressed 
to  an  enlighteiied,  lofiy  nature.  Hence  they  are  the 
highest  conceivable  forms  of  sin.  Addressed  to  the 
whole  nature,  corresponding  to  the  different  periods  of 
life,  the  sensual  (childhood),  intellectual  (youth),  and 
imaginative  (manhood).  The  three  temptations  are 
therefore  comprehensive.  As  to  their  order,  Mth.  and 
Lk.  differ,  hence  the  Rationalistic  cavils.  Mth. 's  order 
is_preferred.  1.  Because  it  exhibits  the  contrast  between 
the  first  two.  2.  Lk.'s  "  get  thee  behind  me  Satan  "  more 
fitting  for  the  closing  scene.  Not  easily  ascertained  what 
determines  Lk.'s  order. 

When  Temptations  ended  "the  devil  departed  from 
him."  "Ay^ft:  xacpob,  till  a  fixed  season,  i.  e.,  to  be  renewed 
at  times.  Some  refer  it  to  Gethsemane,  but  properly _h|s 
whole  life  was  a  temptation.  Following  the  departure 
of  the  devil  "  angels  ministered  unto  him."  Jtrjxovotjv  is 
serving  food,  and  hence  appropriate. 

Nature  of  the  Temptation.  How  was  Christ  approached  ? 
Owing  to  difficulties,  sound,  sober  critics  hav(*  taken 
refuge  in  the  symbolical  rather  than  the  literal,  e.g., 
Pressense  and  Lange.  Doubtless  it  was  something  akin 
to  humanity  because  of  the  "  worshipping  him." 
Grounds:  1.  Bodily  appearance  of  Satan  without  anal- 
ogy in  scripture.  Ans  :  S.  can  assume  the  form  of  an 
"angel  of  light"  if  he  wishes.  2  Cor.  11:  14.  Whj^ 
not  that  of  man  ?  2.  Unimao-inable  that  S.  could  trans- 
port  Christ  through  the  air,  &c.  Ans  :  These  cavilers 
admit  S.  has  power  over  the  soul  which  i^  far  greater, 
then  why  not  over  the  body  ?  Dr.  Alexander  :  No  com- 
pulsion. Verb  means  "  they  went  together,"  and  thus  a 
part  of  Christ's   humiliation   in   allowing  himself  to  be 


^'Ix^CI^/XZa.J—   r 


^^^Ot^Z^^^^-^     A^(iX<?.<lo-^     '^tJi^-v.— ^    Cu^L.-O-t.^-^X^      '>*'t-^.t<-<.,,st,/<yiX^      (L^f^<^lJtZx^- 


-A-j-Cd^^^^       ^dZ^t-.-^.^C'^t-i-"-^ 


l/;-^'     oyiAJi^Jr-  TtoctA^    ^oZa.^^    ^0-t.e..^.^^^J>^  <--i^j,cfjiCtyU/  ^iI^j^mJu^aJL 


57 

tempted.  3.  If  Christ  did  not  know  S.  lie  was  not 
omniscient,  if  he  did  he  would  not  have  conversed  with 
him.  4.  He  could  not  see  the  world's  kin,:^doms  at  once 
without  a  miracle  and  if  he  did  Satan  performed  a  mira-  Pf"^ 
cle.  Ans:  Who  knows  Satan's  power — how  much  divine 
power  .God  had  given  him  ?  Jsixi^'jarj  is  "  causes  to  see."  . 
'Maii^elie\:e  ^causejrlalj  tlm  ber'oi'e  the  mind's 

eye^     If  tliis  is  so  say  some  critics  this  surrenders  the 
literal  inter'n.     N"ot  ?}o.    It  is  deciding  whether  the  literal 
or  metaphorical   should  be  applied'to  the  passage.     5. 
Strauss  :     Satan  too  cunning  to  make   such,  a  proposal. 
Again  :     If  Christ  could  be  tempted  he  was  not  sinless, 
if  so,  no  temptation.     (Lange   and   Pressense:     Christ 
had  but  one  essence  and  that  divine.)     If  it  be  necessaiy 
to  suppose  that  Christ  could  sin  in  order  to  be  tempted, 
then  the  divine  essence  could  have  sinned.     Ques.  of  mid- 
dle ages  since  Augustine:     Can  we  conceive   of  Christ 
as    peccable  ?  ^Now,    we    must    hold    two    things.      I.- 
Christ's tempt,  not  merely  an  external  act,    .  His  struggles 
fierce  £lnd  internal.     They  shook  his  very  soul.     "In  all    i 
points."     2.  "  Yet  without  sin."     Wherefore  he  was  sin-  / 
less. 

Diverse  views  of  the  occurrences.  1.  Strauss  declares 
it  to  be  a  myth.  Meyer  says  there  was  a  conflict  between 
the  kingdoms  of  light  and  darkness.  2.  Schleiermacher  : 
A  parable  given  by  Christ,  and  mistaken  by  his  disciples. 
Intended  to  teach  them  how  to  escape  temptation.  3. 
Nat  :  External  occurrence  uttered  in  symbolical  language. 
Lange.  4.  An  ecstatic  state  of  mind  brought  about  by 
fasting.  Origen  and  Cyprian,  with  Olshausen  in  modern 
times.  5.  Simply  a  conflict  in  Christ's  mind  produced 
by  imagination.  Therefore  Christ  was  necessarily  sin- 
ful. Literature  on  this  is  immense.  Vide  Trench's 
Studies  on  the  Gospels.  ♦  A  .>^5r. 

PUBLIC  MimSTRY. 

Early  Judean  Ministry.     John  1:4. 

Preliminary  :  ^ynoptists  and  Jobji.now  differ.  I.  A5 
tojimits  of  the  period.  Syns.  speak  of  Christ  as  leaving 
^jidfia  for  Gal.  immediately  after  the  Temptation  and 
there  teaching.  They  mention  no  public  work  in  Judea, 
previous  to  His  s^oino-  to  Jerusalem,  toward  the  close  of 


58 

His  ministry.  John  (chs.  1-4)  supplements  their  account, 
mentionino;  a  brief  visit  to  Gnlilee,  then  a  going  to  Jeru- 
salem to  His  first  Passover,  and  a  subsequent  tarrying 
and  baptizing  in  Judea.  Hence.  John  chs.  1-4,  may  be 
termed  History  of  Early  Judean  Ministry. 

n.  They^difFer  as  to  Christ's  teaching,  its  iiature  and 
manner. 

1.  According  to  ^yn.  substance  of  Christ's  teaching  is 
"  khigdom  of  j^God,"  its  nature,  design,  conditions  of 
membership.  (Sermon  on  Mt.,  Parables,  etc.)  In  John 
th.e  phrase  occurs  in  but  two  chs.  (3  :  3-5,  18:  36).        "" 

2.  SyiL.  Christ  silent  as  to  Messianic  claims,  suppresses 
popular  Messianic  enthusiasm  and  refuses  Messianjc 
titles.  In  John  His  Divine  Person  is  the  main  theme. 
(Nicodemus.     Woman  of  Samar.) 

3.  Syn.  say  little  of  His  sacrificial  death,  In  John  it 
is  predicted  from  the  first.     (Vide.  1  :  29,  2  :  19-2X3  flC 

4.  In  Syn.  Christ  teaches  universality  of  ^ospeLanJy 
toward  close  of  His  life.  J_ohn  records  it  among  His 
earliest  utterances.     (Vide.  4  :  21-23). 

Sceptics,  exaggerating  these  difficulties,  reject  John, 
begin  with  Gal.  Ministry,  and  adopting  Syn.  account, 
allege  : 

1.  At  first  Christ  had  no  consciousness  of  Messiahship, 
but  was  driven  to  assume  Messianic  character  to  accom- 
plish His  plans. 

2.  Doctrine  of  a  sacrificial  mission  grew  up  in  His 
mind  gradually.  Strauss  says  both  these  ideas  conceiv- 
ed late  in  life  while  in  Cpesarea  Philippi,  when  He  saw 
death  was  inevitable. 

3.  Idea  of  a  universal  gospel  did  not  originate  until 
after  His  rejection  by  the  Jewish  nation. 

To  reconcile  these  differences  is  the  great  problem  of 
gospel  harmony.  This  may  be  done  by  showing  1st. 
That  there  is  no  j^n consistency  in  the  accounts,  or  2.  T'hat 
their  combination  yields  historic  unity.  (1.)  These  .ac- 
counts involve  one  another  and  are  parts  of  one  whxvk;. 
The  idea  of  king  and  kingdom  are  supplemental.  (2.) 
Syn's  teaching  as  to  Person  of  Christ  is  not  so  meagre  as 
sceptics  claim.  Messianic  titles  are  suppressed,  because 
of  false  Messianic  notions.  From  the  outset  authority  is 
claimed  which  is  irrational  unless  divine. 

The  critical  view  requires  the  rejection  not  of  John 
alone,  but  also  of  a  great  portion  of  the  Syn's  account. 


£ 


9  f  )  ^ 


59 

(Baptism,  Temptation,  Synag.  at  Xazareth,   Sermon   on 
Mt.,  Parables.) 

(3.)  In  John,  Christ  does  teach  "the  kingdom."  (To 
Nicodemus  3:3-5.  Before  Pilate  18:36.)  In  Syn. 
there  are  passages  teaching  divinity  (Matt.  11 :  25-30.) 

(4.)  A  progress  is  marked  in  the  self- revelation  of 
Christ  in  Jno.  as  well  as  in  Syn.  In  public  it  is  enig- 
matical ;  direct  declarations  are  private.  (Cleansing  tem- 
ple.    Discourse  with  Nicodemus  and  Samaritan  woman.) 

Historical  reason  for  this  difference  :  Christ  owed  a 
duty  to  the  Jews  as  a  nation,  first.  They  could  not  be 
rejected  until  they  had  rejected  Him,  Jno's  plan  is  to 
record  instances  of  Christ's  declaration  of  Messiahship 
in  Jerusalem.  When  rejected  there,  He  goes  to  Galilee, 
prepares  for  the  founding  of  a  church,  with  its  officers 
and  government,  as  is  related  by  the  Syn.  ^ 

'  Jno.  1-4  :  45  in  the  harmony  are  inserted  between  \ 
Matt.  4:  11  and  12  (Vide  Scheme.)  To  justify  such  in-^ 
sertion,  it  must  be  shown  :  ^ 

1.  No  real  contradiction  exists  between  the  two  ac- 
counts. 2.  The  portion  omitted  was  not  in  the  plan  of 
the  individual  writer.  3.  Combination  furnishes  a  con- 
sistent view.  4.  Many  undesigned  coincidences  evince 
that  the  accounts  presuppose  one  another. 

Reasons  for  insertion  here  : 

1.  Alt^  '"iiitl  Mk.  indicate  space  between  Temptation 
and  Galilean  Ministry,  by^aylng  that  Christ  went  to 
Galilee  because  of  the  imprisonment  of  Jno.  Bap. 

2.  These  four  chaps.  Jji(x.xeeord  interviews  between 
Jesus  and  Jno.  Bap.  They  must  have  occurred  before 
Jno.  was  imprisoned.  They  must  have  occurred  ^fter 
the  Baptism — as  it  is  referred  to  as  past  (Jno  1:32), 
and  if  later  than  the  Baptism  thev  must  be  subsequent 
to  the  Temptation,  as  nothing  intervened  between  these 
ev^ents'(Mk.  1 :  12).  Four  chs.  of  Jno.  at  least  should  be 
inserted  here  as  the  narrative  is  unbroken.  Some  har- 
monists insert  five — thus  changing  the  time  of  the  begin- 
ning of  the  Galilean  ministry. 

Length  of  this  period  is  inferred  from  §25.  Jno.  4 : 
35.  Four  months  till  harvest.  Harvest  time  was  the 
middle  of  Nisan,  i.e.  beginning  of  April 

Four  months  previous  brings  us  to  December,  eight 
months  subsequent  to  the  first IPassover  (ch.  3),  and  one 


60 

/yea r _ j,tter_  th e   Baptism.     Hence    duration   of  Judean\ 
[   minTstry  is  estimated  as  one  year!     (So  Meyer,  Wieseier)7) 
xiie  exegesis  ot  sOme  assigns  to   this  verse  merely  the 
weight  of  a    proverb — (1)  (jlratuitons.     No  evidence  of 
such  proverb,     (2)  Force    of  in  forbids  (so   Meyer  vs. 
Alford  and  Wieseler).     These  minor  difterences  do  not 
essentially  affect  the  events  of  the  period. 
Designs  of  the  events  of  this  period  : 

1.  Priynary.  Offering  Himself,  to  nation  as  the  true 
Messiah^ — by,  n.  Testimony  of  Jno.  T3af).~fc  Clean  sing 
Temple — showing  supreme  authority  in  House  of  God. 
c.  Miracles.  (/.  Teaching  spiritual  nature  of  Plis  kingdqni. 

2.  Secondary.  Preparation  for  Galilean  mTimfiy',  in 
consequence  of  foreseen  rejection  by  Jewisli  hierarchy^ — 
by,  a.  Brief  visit  to  Galilee,  b.  Choice  of  disciples  irje- 
spective^of  existing  theocracy,  c.  Stay  in  Jndea,  teach- 
ing and  baptizing  with  J  no.  Bap.,  until  his  imprisonment. 

Sej'ies  of  first  things  is  given  in  Jno.  ;  viz.  first  gath- 
ering of  discipTes,lEn^mTracle7^rst Tassover,  first  teach- 
ing, &c.     Jno   rpcorfl&jU}Leek^Iii^tQxy-3;^daX-l>Xl]i^li-- 

1st  day  1 :  19-28,  2d.  1 :  29-34,  3d^.  1 :  35-42;iJ|iiri  : 
43-51,  and  2  :  1,  zfj  '^jfJ-ifO-  rfj  TfilzYj,  i.  e.  the  third  day 
after  starting  on  His  journey,  making  seven  days  in  all. 
Compare  Jno's  record  of  last  week  of  Christ's  life. 

yf §18.   Testimony  of  John  Bapt.  to  Jesus.    ^iichlestijTipn^', 

^  naturally  to  be  expected  at  this  period,  historically  oc- 
curs. Sjuilifidrim  send  from  Jerus.  a  deputation  of 
Priests  and  Levites  to  i  n  q  u  i  r  e  iif f  o  tli  em  ea  n  i  n  g  of  John's 
work.  Their  arrival  at  the  Jordan  coincides  with  Christ's 
return  from  the  desert  of  the  temptation  (v.  27.)  (Others 
however  place  Christ's  return  at  v,  29  on  the  day  follow- 
ing). This  deputation  evinces  the  extensive  i nr^iiigigsion 
produced  by  John's  work.  The  mission  was  authorita- 
tive, sent  out  by  the  highest  ecclesiastical  court  of  the 
nation,  whose  duty  it  was"  to  investigate  all  religious 
movements.  It_\yi,is  not  necessarily  hostilejit  fir^t*  Had 
they  found  John  easily  influenced'and  a  courtier  (Lk.  7  : 
25),  they  would  have  favored  his  views  and  used  him  as 
an  instrument  in  furthering  their  own  designs.  (John 
5:  35);  b_iitJiaviiig  .heard  Im  tes.timony  to  Christ,  tfiev 
charge  him  with  "  having  a  devil.''  (LkrT  :  33.)  Their 
questions  show  acquaintance  with  the  prevailing  belief 
that  the  Messiah  was  at  hand,  and  exhibit  the  state  of 


'hvci^k  o-lJV  -f^ 


X^QjcLu^^^^ 


^ 


61 


popular  Messianic  expectations.  Art  thou  the  Christ, 
or  Elias  (Mai.  4  :  5),  or  that  prophet.     (Deut.  18  :  15.) 

Does  not  John's  denial  that  he  is  Elias,  contradict 
Christ's  express  statement.  Matt.  11:  14?  Ans  :  John 
denies  he  is  Elias  in  person  :  admits  he  is  in  spirit  bj 
quotinp^  prophecies  referring  to^TflTas,  as  referring  to 
himself  otHcially. 

Jews  of  that  day,  seem  to  have  made  a  false  distinc- 
tion based  on  Deut.  18  :  15,  between  Christ  and  '•  that 
prophet."     (John  4  :  19,  25,  6 :  14,  7  :  40,  41). 

To  these  questions,  John  returns  an  abrupt  "  No," 
wishing  to  keep  himself  in  the  background,  while  he 
brings  Jesus  forward.  He  defines  his  own  mission  and 
character,  In-  simply  quoting  Is.  40  :  3. 

Points  of  interest  are  1.  Extent  of  John's  J_nfluence. 

2.  Excited  Messianic  expectations   and  their  character. 

3.  ProvidentiaL  care  that  rulers  should  be  brought  into 
contact  with  Christ,  and  receive  ample  proof  of  His 
claims,  fmm^the  very  first,  4.  Humility  of  John  Bap. 
Lange  noies  analogy  between  temp,  of  Christ  and  John, 
a  temptation  to  external  power. 

Place.  Text.  Recpt.  eu  Br^&a^apa,  (John  1  :  28), 
critical  reading,  lirj&o.vta.  Location,  now  unknown. 
Probably  e.  of  Jordan  ;  a  ford  near  Jericho.  Renewed 
testimony,  (v.  29).  "  Lamb  of  God."  One  of  the  most 
striking  passages  of  scripture.  It  embodies  the  great 
truths  of  both  Testaments  and  declares  the  fulfillment  of 
})rophecy.  The  theme  of  the  O.  T.  is  one  to  come.  John^ 
saysJ^Behold  Him,"  "  He  is  here."  '' 

Hengst(Mn3erg~confin~es"lT!ir~reference  to  the  Paschal 
Lamb,  as  being  the  true  sin-oiiering.  But  John  uses 
^'  Lamb  "  as  rep'resentative  of  all  O.  t.  sacrificial  types. 
^  KeasonslxJTselectja^'JLamb"  as  a  titleof  Cb-Fistiire, 
1.  FjalfiJii-ig-  5'^  :  "TT  "  LamS^to  the  slaughter,"  which 
Jew-srecognTzecTas  Messianic.  2.  Expresses  the  spirit 
of.  Christ's  ministry.     (Comp.  Rev.  5:6.) 

Some  critics  deny  a  sacrificial  reference,  others  object, 
1.  That  John  in  here  teaching  vicarious  death  of  Christ 
as  Son  of  God,  for  the  woricl,  displays  a  knowledge  of 
doctrines  not  then  current,  but  which  were  the  after 
development  of  advanced  theology.' 

Ans.  a.  Objection  based  on  subversion  of  history. 
These  conceptions  of  Messiah's  work  were  fundamental  : 


62 

they  liad  died  out  of  tbej20jgular_.cr^ 
sion  \vasto  revive  them. 

"6.  John  speaks  as  ajmx)phet  and  was  himself  sur- 
prised at  the  manner  in  which  his  prophecies  were  ful- 
filled.    (Lk.  7  :  20):r  >vVJa.  >..^  xv  ->c-..- 

2d  Objection,  John  1  :  33  "  I  knew  him  not  "  contra- 
dicts Mt.  3  :  14,  which  presupposes  knowledge  of  Jesus, 
both  as  man  and  Messiah. 

Ans.  a.  Distinction  between  knowing  officially  and 
personally.  (Rob.  Gk.  Harm.  p.  187,  §18.  Note.)  John 
Bap.  was  aware  that  Jesus  of  Naz.  was  Messiah  of  proph- 
ecy. "But  he  knew  not  Jesus  personally  "  before  His 
baptism,  when  the  spirit  descended  as  sign  upon  him. 
This  is  not  an  explanation.  If  he  did  not  know  him  per- 
sonally, why  refuse  to  baptize  him  (Mt.  3  :  14).  To  ex- 
plain by  dignity  of  Christ's  personal  appearance  (Farrar 
I.  p.  114  seq.)  is  unsatisfactory. 

h.  Better  explanation,  oox  -qdecv  has  only  relative 
force.  John  Bap.'s  previous  knowledge  was  subjective, 
now  possessing  a  iiewj£iiowledge  based  on  testimony 
from  heaven,  he  makes  an  official  declaration. .  (Comp. 
relative  use  of  terms  by  John  in  chs.  2  :  11,  and  a  further 
and  increased  belief  based  on  testimony  of  miracles,  also 
7:5). 

§19.  Jesus  gains  disciples.  Had  the  writer  of  the  fourth 
gospel  been  an  impostor,  John  Bap.'s  testimony  would 
have  been  succeeded  by  the  abandonment  of  his  separate 
work,  his  following  Christ  as  a  disciple,  going  with  him 
to  Jerus.  and  testifying  to  His  Messiahship  before  the 
Sanhedrim.  Multitudes  would  have  accepted  and  fol- 
lowed Him.  On  the  contrary,  the  gospel  narrative  in- 
forms us  that  but  few  believe,  that  John  Bap.  recogniz- 
ing the  independency  of  his  own  ministry  keeps  aloof 
from  Christ  and  continues  bearing  testimony  to  Him  as 
the  Messiah. 

Design  of  Christ  in  gathering  disciples.  1.  JTd  Ifind  peo- 
ple to  Him  gradually.  2.  He  thus  begins  to  lay  the 
foundation  of  that  church  which  was  to  continue  after 
He  had  been  taken  away,  an  action  based  on  foreknow- 
ledge of  His  death.  Although  submitting  Himself  to 
the  people  for  their  rejection,  He  acts  as  knowing  the  re- 
sult. 


# 


A 
^  ^ 


^ 


1)- 


63 

V.  35-37.  Next  day  at  tenth  hour  i.  e.-4=P~M.,  two 
disciples  of  John  follow  Jesus:  first  converts:  their  ad- 
dress "  Rabbi "  the  first  recognition  of  Christ  as  a  teacher. 

Of  these  two,  one  was  Andrew,  the  other  is  argued 
to  have  been  Evangelist  John,  from,  1.  Hls_  habit aal 
silence  as  to  himself.  2.  The  minuteness  of  the  details 
proves  the  narrator  to  have  been  an  eye  witness,  3. 
SjiLjiiendon  John^among  the  first  disciples. 

41  V.     Twofold  exegesis, — r.riono^  : 

1.  Andrew  and  John  seek  each  his  own  brother  :  An- 
drew finds  his  first.     (So  Meyer  and  Alexander). 

2.  Both  seek  Peter:  Andrew  is  first  to  find  him. 

43  V.  The  next  day  Philip,  being  called,  brings  ISTath. 
commonly  understood  to  be  Bartholomew — because  1. 
John  never  mentions  a  Bartholomew  nor  the  Synops.  a 
Nathaniel.  2.  Time  of  his  call,  while  journeying  through 
Gal.  :  (Barthol.  resided  at  Cana  of  Galilee).  ^"3.  When 
Christ  showed  Himself  to  his  disciples  after  resurrection 
at  sea  of  Tiberias,  Nath.  was  of  their  number.  (John 
21 :  1,  2.)  4.  Philip  brought  Nath.  :  and  the  names 
Philip  and  Bartholomew  always  together  in  the  cata- 
logues of  the  Twelve.  5.  Bartholomew  is  u  patronymic, 
son  of  Tolmai,  by  which  name  he  was  probably  better 
known  than  by  that  of  Nathaniel.  (Vide.  Farrar  I.  p. 
152  and  Note).  Thus  6  disciples  are  called  in  the  first 
week. 

ObjecUm :  In  Mt.  16  :  18,  Peter's  change  of  name  is 
connected  with  his  confession,  thus  contradicting  John 
1 :  42.  Ans.  Name  Cephas  is  here  fiioen  ;  in  Mt.  Christ 
confirms  and  applies  it. 

Note  the  character  of  those  called  :  religious-minded 
men  :  come  to  Jordan  to  hear  John  ;  meet  Christ :  listen 
to  Bap.'s  testimony  concerning  Him,  and  are  convinced 
of  the  validity  of  His  claims. 

Rationalists  allege  that  Syn.  (Lk.  5:  1-11)  represent 
disciples  as  following  Christ  because  of  miracles  He  per- 
formed. John  says  (1.  35-51)  they  were  impressed  by 
His  j)ersonal  influence.  These  accounts  are  not  incon- 
sistent. According  to  both,  Christ  furnishes  evidence  of 
His  Messiahship.  "Here  he  calls  Philip  with  authority, 
shows  divine  knowledge  in  reading  mind  of  Nath.,  claims 
to  be  the  connecting  link  betw^een  heaven  and  earth. 
(Comp.  Gen.  28  :  12). 


64 

.N-ot©  the  only  recorded  words  of  Jesus^jip_to_this 
point.  At  12  years  of  ao:e  to  liis  mother7Tdv,_2_LJ.9.  To 
Jphn.Bap.MtTS  :  15."  TolSatiji,:Mt,_4  :  1-11.  To  His 
disciples,  John  1  :  39. 

§207  John  2:  1-12.  31arriage  at  Cana.  John  here 
emphasizes  the  fact  of  the  '^  ber/inninc/  of  miracles."  Ch. 
2  :  11.  Cana  of  Gal.  mentioned,  not  to  distinguish  tlie 
town  from  another  of  the  same  name,  but  to  show  that 
the  beginnijTgs  of  Christ's  work  were  in  Gal. 

Wi2jJii.ixali]ee  and  before  in  Jerusafem  ?  1.  Predig- 
tion  (Is.  9  :  1,  2,  quoted  Matt.  4  :  14)  that  Gal.  should  be 
first  to  receive  spiritual  light,  is  thus  fulfilled.  2.  John, 
who  confines  his  account  to  Christ's  Judean  work,  thus 
shows  his  knowledge  of  the  work  in  Galilee. 

Christ  went  to  Galilee  at  this  time,  both  as  aj^repara- 
tion  fbiiTtHe  coming  Gal.  ministry,  and  to  produce  a 
simultaneous  jmpression  in  dift'erent  parts  of  the  country 
by  his  appearance  in  various  places  within  a  short  time, 
o-iving  opportunity  for  judgment  upon  himself  and  work. 
This  visit  is  an  episode  in  Judean  Period,  pointing  for- 
ward to  the  next. 

Farrar  identifies  Cana  with  Kefr-Kenna.  (Vide  Vol. 
I.  Note,  p.  161.  Andrews,  p.  149).  Robinson  prefers 
Kana  el  Jelil. 

That  the  marriage  was  among  Chrlst's-i*eia-tives  has 
been  inferred  from  Mary's  prominence  at  the  feast ;  as 
to  the  parties  themselves  conjecture  is  fruitless.  Joae-ph 
beiiig  unnientioned,  it  may  be  assumed  he  was  now 
dead.  Jewish  marriage  feasts  usually  lasted  7  days 
(Tudg.  14  :  12).  Festivities  had  begun  when  Jesus  ar- 
rived. 

Objections:  1.  How  did  Mary  know  he  could  perform 
mirac]§.s,  if  this  was  first?  especiallj  as  the  occasion  did 
not  demand  it.  Wine  might  readily  be  purchased.  Ajis  : 
Soraej^he  wrougbt  miracles  in  private;  some,  she  looked 
toHBiTm  naturally  for  aid;  others,  from  circumstaiices  of 
his  birth,  she  bad  come  to  believe  in  his  divinity;  others, 
knowing  his  work  had  been  inaugurated  by  his  baptism, 
she  looked  for  a  speedj-  fulfillment  of  her  hopes. 

27  How  reconcile  Christ's  working  the  miracle  with 
his  statement,  "  My  hour  is  not  yet  come,"  v.  4.  Ans  : 
Mistaken  idea  in  her  mind  as  to  character  of  Messianic 
kingdom,  viz.,  ^jme  of  niateriaj_j)lenty.       Christ  shows 


hx-^y^^a^-c/^    .^c^  ?t    .WU«^c</-      -;f^-t3^r^    >c.tlg      /^j^^r-y,     /^-^.^aIvU,     /C 


3'^'ux^  a^rt^C^^  ^,,^^'c;L   ti^  c^LU^C^^^r^-oji^    a^j..,_  ^  ^  g-^  .y^j 


S^^t,L^.^^  cJr^ktj^   -Lv-o<UL/  <9^    ^.^^^  ^^K^^  JftAA^' djuxA^  . 


-/'^^t-w   o^a^oo^u^v^v,^  ^^.jLu  aJ/Z^   ,'U-^^-€>uJ^  t})  '-^J^-o-^  XJUt,-^ 


(//     >2v^x>    .^L/.l^LC:^c0^^y^^.,^^....:ao<>^  .    2Xi^    /^  ■'^^   t/tJb 


65 

that  human  motives,  even  the  most  urgent,  were  not  to 
be  the  cause  of  the  manifestation  of  his  ^lory  as  Messiah 
Comp.  Lk.  2  :  49. 

3.  Amount  of  wine  produced.  Each  firkin  or  bath 
(Heb.)  contained  from  7  to  9  gals.,  hence  each  jar  held 
about  f  of  a  barrel.  (Vide  Farrar,  Vol.  L,  p.  166,  note 
2)  Ans:  Some  argue  from  v.  8,  that  the  water  became 
wine,  as  drawn,  or  was  a  handsome  wedding  gift  for  a 
poor  household.  The  large  quantit}'  is  significant  of 
Christ's  giving  without  measure.  It  pr^chides  all  possi- 
bility of  collusion. 

Designs.  1.  To  manifest  his  glory.  2.  To  relieve 
want  and  embarrassment  of  host.  3.  Teaches  true  mor- 
ality ;  contrasts  John  the  ascetic  with  Christ,  who  did 
not  withdraw  from  the  world,  but  lived  above  it.  4. 
Enforces  the  sanctity  of  the  marriage  tie.  It  is  analogous 
to  feeding  the  multitudes;  but  here,  substance  is 
changed,  there  multiplied.  (On  this  miracle,  vide 
Princeton  Review,  July  and  October,  1865). 

From  Cana,  Christ  goes  to  Capernaum  (emended 
text,  e/c  Kaifafjvaohn)^  probably  to  join  a  caravan  there 
making  up  for  the  feast.  From  Lk.  4  :  23  it  has  been 
inferred  that  Christ  at  this  time  wrought  miracles  there. 
It  is  preferable  to  refer  this  allusion  to  healing  noble- 
man's son,  Jno.  4  :  46-54. 

§21.  John  2  :  13-25.  First  Passover.  Temple  Cleansed. 
Christ  finds  the  Temple  polluted  by  the  presence  of  cat- 
tle and  doves  for  sacrifice,  and  of  money  changers,  ex- 
changing foreign  coin.  Although  Christ  used  a  scourge, 
the  foxce  employed  was  moral  and  spiritual  rather  than 
physical.  Fdvza^  (v.  15)  refers  to  men  as  well  as  cattle. 
Some  infer  from  v.  16,  said,  etc.,  leniency  toward  dove- 
sellers.  Captious  cavil.  Command  is  given,  because 
doves  could  not  be  scourged. 

V.  16,  "  make  not,"  etc.  Comp.  stronger  utterance 
Matt.  21  :  13,— quoted  from  Is.  56 :  7, — employed  at  sec- 
ond cleansing  of  the  Temple.  V.  17  quot.  from  Ps. 
69:  9. 

Significance  of  the  act :  1.  Teaches  lesson  in  repent- 
ance, and  need  of  reformation.  2.  Symbolical  expression 
of  Messianic  claims.  Declares  God  his  Father  (v.  16), 
assumes  supreme  authority  in  temple  (fulfilling  Mai.  3  : 
1-3),  refers  to  Temple  as  type  of  his  body  (v.  19),  God's 


66 

permanent  indwelling,  typically  represented  in  the  Tem- 
ple, being  literal  in  his  life.  Christ  in  public  declares 
Messiahship  thus  enigmatically,  because,  1.  People  are 
not  ready  to  receive  him ;  false  Messianic  notions  pre- 
vail ;  more  explicit  statement  would  lead  to  popular  out- 
break. 2.  Bibje  an  oriental  book.  Jews  an  Eastern 
nation.  To  them  an  enigmatic  act  needed  no  interpre- 
tation. That  the  Jews  understood  him  is  evident  from 
their  demanding  a  sign,  v.  18.  This  shows  they  were 
knowingly  rejecting  Christ,  although  possessing  evidence 
of  John  Bapt.,  of  prophets,  and  of  Christ's  miracles.  By 
si(/n  they  denoted  an  outward  manifestation  coinciding 
with  their  idea  of  Messiah.  Sign  given  v.  19,  afterwards 
called  sign  of  Jona,  contains  indisputable  reference  to 
his  resurrection  (v.  21).  This  is  only  occasion  of  Christ's 
predicting  his  resurrection  on  third  day.  That  his  ene- 
mies understood  him  is  seen  from  their  allusion  to  it 
after  his  death.     (Matt.  27  :  63.) 

Critical  Objections.  1.  Unhistoric  expectation  and  pre- 
diction of  his  death.  He  could  not  yet  forsee  this  issue; 
people  and  disciples  could  not  understand  him.  [Nean- 
der  and  Olshausen,  denying  any  reference  to  resurrection, 
interpret,  '  Persist  and  destroy  this  national  temple,  and 
I  will  found  a  spiritual  church.'] 

Ans  :  Not  necessary  for  Christ  to  limit  his  discourses 
by  what  others  could  understand.  True  exegesis  uses 
padv,  V.  19,  in  typical,  not  double  sense. 

2.  Obj.  Boldness  of  act  would  enrage  the  Jews  and 
excite  opposition. 

Ans  :  The  suddenness  and  justice  of  the  act  combined 
with  the  air  of  Christ's  personal  authority  (Cp.  John  18  : 
6)  account  for  no  popular  disturbance. 

3.  Syn.  record  a  similar  scene  in  Passion  Week  ;  could 
not  have  occurred  twice,  hence  both  are  mythical. 

Alls  :  Why  not  twice  ?  Appropriate  at  beginning  and 
end  of  ministry.  A  first  and  last  opportunity  of  accept- 
ing him.  John,  who  above  records  the  early  Judean 
ministry,  mentions  the  cleansing  occurring  in  that  period, 
and  to  avoid  repetition  omits  the  second,  contained  in 
the  Syn.  Strauss  understands  cleansing  as  a  real  act, 
but  in  opposition  to  Judaism  and  the  entire  sacrificial 
system. 

V.  23  alludes  to  further  miracles.  None  recorded, 
John  introducing  miracles  only  for  sake  of  the  connected 


^d.x^^  '^.A^-i-i.^^-'CA'^      ^-v-w      <3c^  ^'ay\y    -t,*«-t,-€^    -^b-J-r/, 


i:^ 


'C     o^-itZrJ-^-^ , 


,4:^^->-r.£-'V'5 


67 

discourses.  Verses  23,  25.  Effect.  "  Many  believed," 
with  evanescent  faith,  founded  only  upon  the  miracles. 
(Comp.  eruaze'jaay,  v.  23,  s-ktzsusv,  v.  24.  "  Many  trusted 
him.     He  did  not  trust  himself  to  them.") 

§22.  John  3  :  1-21.  Discourse  with  Nicodemus.  Nico- 
demus,  member  of  Sanh-edrim,  on  evidence  of  miracles 
believes  Christ  to  be  a  divinely  appointed  teacher.  He 
is  mentioned  (Comp.  7  :  50),  Tabernacles,  also  (ch.  19  :  39) 
burial.  "Coming  by  night "  shows  odium  already  at- 
taching to  Christ.  Being  a  Pharisee  and  ruler,  his  visit 
shows  that  Christ's  influence  was  not  confined  to  a  sin- 
gle class. 

Jesus  teaches,  1.  Nature,  necessity,  source  of  the  new 
birth,  2.  Spiritual  nature  ot  kingdom  of  heaven.  3.  In 
order  to  regeneration  there  is  necessit}'  for  faith  in  him- 
self, as  only  revealer  of  the  Father,  and  sacrifice  for  sin. 
Christ  declares  his  pre-existence  ;  displays  foreknowledge 
of  the  atonement. 

Perplexity  of  Nicodemus  evinces  total  loss  among  his 
class,  of  spiritual  meaning  of  0.  Test.  Christ's  rebuke 
(v.  10)  shows  that  he  is  teaching  no  new  doctrine. 

Objections  to  genuineness  of  the  Discourse.  1.  These  doc- 
trines not  developed  until  later.  2.  Terms  and  ideas  are 
those  of  heretical  school  in  early  church,  especially  such 
phrases,  "  Christ  the  only  revealer  of  the  Father,"  "  new 
birth,"  etc.  "  Regeneration'"  not  a  N.  T.  word.  Verbal 
iorm  occurs  16  times;  peculiar  to  John.  Only  allied 
form  in  N.  T.  is  nahrrevsaia,  Mi.  19:  28,  Tit.  3  :  5. 

Strauss  regards  whole  discourse  as  Jc.tlon,  bearing 
impress  of  Pseudo  John's  mind.  Nicod.  an  ideal  charac- 
ter introduced  as  offset  to  the  reproach  that  all  first  con- 
verts were  trom  the  poorer  class. 

Bauer.  All^^egory;  Nicodemus  representing  unbe- 
lieving Judaism,  seeking  a  sign,  a  counterpart  of  the 
woman  of  Samaria,  who  represents  believing  heathen- 
ism. 

Sceptical  Inferences.  These  doctrines,  peculiar  to 
John's  gospel,  are  those  of  Gnosticism.  Hence  the 
fourth  gospel  must  have  been  written  as  late  as  close  of 
2nd  Cent,  by  a  Gnostic,  probably  a  Valentinian. 

Ans.  1.  Terminology  alone  is  peculiar  to  John,  not 
the  doctrine.  Both  Testaments  teach  these  doctrines. 
Comp.  O.  T.  expression  Ps.  51 :  10  "  clean  heart :"  also 


68 

Paul's  phrase  ''xrcma''  Gal.  6:  15.  'i.  True  relation  of 
Gnosticism  to  N.  T.  doctrine,  a.  Sceptics  exaggerate 
the  resemblance ;  more  difference  than  likeness,  b. 
Gnosticism  a  heresy  arising  within  the  church.  Its  ideas 
andierms  are  borrowed  from  John.  c.  Alexandrian  phi- 
losoj)hy  of  which  Gnosticism  was  an  otf-shoot  was  imbued 
with  O.  T.  ideas.  N.  T.  was  the  development  of  these 
ideas.  Hence  both  drawing  from  a  common  source  em- 
ployed to  some  degree  similar  modes  of  thought  and  ex- 
pression, d.  Chi^ist  dealt  with  the  philosophical  ques- 
tions of  his  time.  e.  John,  writing  when  Gnostic  specu- 
lation had  begun  to  disturb  the  church,  like  Paul,  (Cp. 
Eph.  and  Col.)  writes  against  it,  using  its  nomenclature. 
Christ's  teachings  now  are  clearer  than  those  subse- 
quently given  in  Galilee,  because,  1.  His  great  purpose 
of  offering  Himself  to  the  Jews  as  their  Messiah  neces- 
sitated lucid  statement  of  nature  and  blessings  of  His 
kingdom.  In  Galilee  His  audiences  were  popular  and 
His  aim  was  to  establish  the  church.  2.  This  was  pri- 
vate interview,  with  a  well  disposed  inquirer.  (Cp. 
woman  of  Samaria.) 

.  §23.  John  3  :  22-36.  Jesus  remains  in  Judea  and  bap- 
tizes. Some  conjecture,  without  reason,  that  Christ  re- 
turned from  Jerus.  into  Gal.  Christ  leaves  Jerusalem, 
not  on  account  of  open  hostility,  but  because  after  offer- 
ing Himself  to  the  Jews,  he  had  been  rejected.  He  tar- 
ries in  Judea  (v.  22).  1.  National  promises  must  be  ful- 
filled :  offer  of  Himself  be  made  more  general,  not  re- 
stricted to  a  single  feast.  He  may  have  attended  Pente- 
cost and  Tabernacles  during  this  period.  2.  John's  testi- 
mony having  not  yet  ended,  the  Galilean  Ministry  could 
not  properly  begin. 

Meagre  description  of  Christ's  work  ..at  this  period, 
no  miracles,  no  long  discourses,  leads  to  inference  that 
little  was  done.  His  work  is  same  as  that  of  Bap.  1. 
Facts  show  likeness.  Christ  employed  the  same  rite  as 
John,  with  same  import,  for  as  no  subsequent  mention 
of  baptism  occurs  until  Pentecost,  Christian  baptism  was 
not  instituted  until  after  Christ's  death.  2.  Christ's 
early  teaching  in  Galilee,  evidently  similar  to  that  in 
Judea,  and  John  Bap.'s  work,  are  described  in  the  same 
language.  3.  As  Christ's  work  and  John's  are  parallel 
in  time,  both  would   naturally  pursue  the  same  line  of 


- . 


<t 


X^, ^a-iCx.^   ,>.t-«— >.-<>^    ..-o<^-o<?Z<,    -^^^^ 


->i^H-t-K>dAj 


3  t 


f/^--^^  ,^2fi^  ^i^cu^ckoA  X;/^l^£r^- 

--^   ^^-^^--^   X^^^c^  ,        CUjiUu    ^IJ^^dU   ^a<^.<^^>'rr^^ 

^    ^^H^  -^  /L/y^y^^^lt^oU^^^  ^UoCAf^^^yvCotM/  C^Q^^z^{yu,..ajAM/i- 


r\ 


69 

teaching.     There  would  not  be  two  different  baptisms  in 
same  period   of  development.     Remarks  ;  John    Bap.'s 
hold  on  the  masses  gradually  transferred  to  Christ:  His 
work  thus  growing  out  of  John's.     They  do   not  unite, 
for   that  would   destroy   their  proper    relation.     Christ 
stands  aside  as  Messiah.     John  points  to  Him.     They  do 
not  separate  widely,  either  in  place  or  teaching,  lest  they 
should  be  mistaken   for  rival  prophets,     v.  24.     "  John 
was  not  yet  cast  into  prison."     From  fourth  gospel  alone  i 
no  exegetical  reason  can  be  assigned  for  this  statement../ 
John  however  wrote  with  Syn.  before  him.     They  make/ 
no  mention  of  Judean   ministry  but  date  Christ's  work! 
in    Gal.   from   the  imprisonment  of  John    Bap.      John 
shows  that  his  narrative  of  Judean  work  does  not  con- 
flict with  any  Syn.  statements  because  Christ  had  not  at 
this  time  enteretl  upon  Galilean  ministry,  "for  John  was 
not  yet  caat  into  prison,"  i.  e.  Bap.'s  testimony  was  not  yet 
ended,   it  was  not  yet  time  for   Christ  to  leave  Judea. 
^non  near  Salim  probably  in  Valley  of  Jordan  Western 
side,  near  Jericho.     (Farrar  1.  p.  202,  Note.) 

v.  25.  Question  started  as  to  purifying,  between  John's 

disciples   and  a  Jew   (Emended   Text   v.   25.     loodaeoo.) 

Bap.'s  disciples  complain   to  him  of  Christ's  baptizing. 

He  bears  additional  testimony  to  Jesus;  declaring  that 

not  to   accept  Him  as   Messiah,   means  condemnation. 

(v.  36.) 

-yp/-      V.  31-36.  Some  say  without  good  reason  that  these  are 

<^    words  of  Evangelist,  rather  than  of  John  Bap.  for  they 

display  an  acquaintance  with  doctrines  not  then  revealed. 

r       Points  of  interest.     1.  John  Bap.  still  had  a  body  of  dis- 

/ciples.     2.  John  still  regards  his  ministry  subordinate  to 

I  Christ.     3.  Clear  views  of  John  concerning  Christ. 

^      §25.  John  4  :  4-42.     Woman  of  Samaria— Si/char.    This 

name  occurs  nowhere  else  in  scripture.     Common  view, 

that  it  is  nickname  for  Shechem,  meaning  "  drunkard," 

or  "  liar"  is  based  on,  Is.  28  :  1-7,  where  Ephraimites  are 

called,  shiccorim  "  drunkards  ;"  Hab.   2 :  18  moreh  sheker 

"  teacher  of  lies"  which  is  said  to  refer  to  Moreh,  the 

original  name  of  district  of  Shechem  ;  and  habitual  use 

by  John  of  hyo/Mvo^  (v.  5)  to  denote  a  soubriquet  (cp.  11  : 

16,  19 :  13-17.) 

Some  say  Sychar  was  suburb  of  Shechem.     Jacob's 
well,  near  entrance  of  valley,  mile  from  present  city, 


70 

"  one  of  few  spots  identified    with   Christ's   presence." 
6th  hour  i.  e.  noon. 

Diiferent  tone  of  woman  and  Nicodeinus.  Nicodemus, 
sober,  grave,  and  earnest,  regards  Christ  as  teacher. 
Woman,  sprightly,  conversational,  looks  upon  Christ  as 
traveller.  Christ  varies  His  teaching  to  suit  each  case. 
With  Nicodemusan  instructed  Jew,  He  dwells  on  techni- 
cal topics  of  religion  e.  g.  doctrines  of  new-birth.  To 
the  woman  He  speaks  of  a  supply  for  the  soul — thirst 
common  to  all. 

Two  views  of  Samaritans.  1.  Common  view.  En- 
tirely heathen  ;  no  descent  from  Jacob,  no  right  to  0.  T. 
privileges.  2.  Mixed  race — remnants  of  10  tribes  and 
heathen  settlers — looking  for  Messiah  as  a  prophet  (John 
4  :  25).  They  stand  in  N.  T.  as  a  link  between  Jews  and 
heathen.  Not  regarding  them  as  chosen  people,  Christ 
does  not  pursue  ministry  among  them  Mt,  10  :  5. 
Although  non-Judaic,  they  were  not  pagan  (v.  20). 

A  historical  import  of  this  incident,  prediction  of  the 
universal  spread  of  the  gospel, — the  natural  sequel  of 
discourse  with  Nicodemus.  To  him  Christ  taught  the 
spiritual  nature  of  His  kingdom.  If  spiritual  it  must  be 
universal,  and  all  formal  barriers  be  done  away. 

Samaritans  believed  on  hearing  Christ's  words  (v.  41, 
42).     Jews  disbelieved  though  beholding  His  miracles. 

Sceptics  object:  Christ  here  makes  distinct  claim  to  Mes- 
siahship,  "  I  am  He,"  but  few  days  later,  in  Galilee,  for- 
bids any  allusion  to  his  divinity,  even  among  disciple*. 
Ans  :  Christ  is  in  foreign  country.  His  statements  would 
provoke  no  hostility  from  the  rulers.  This  is  no  real  ad- 
vance on  His  teaching  to  Nicodemus  or  John  Bapt's  testi- 
mony concerning  Him.  But  now  He  assumes  title  of 
Messiah  for  first  time. 

/  Distinguish  in  this  period  between  private  and  pjiliiic 
/  teaching.  His  utterances  in  private  are  unrestrained,  in 
1  public,  symbolic. 

_ .  ^v  ^y        GALILEAN  MINISTRY. 

Ministry  in   Eastern   Galilee. 

Gal.  Ministry  extends  from  the  close  of  Judean  until 
the  three  last  feasts.  The  Feeding  of  5,000  divides  this 
Ministry  into  those  of  Eastern   and  Northern   Gal.     Its 


^^i^-^    ^  A*^L^  ,      tla^^     Ck-^^  nn^lJl^  Py^  Q^  oi/^J^^y'Ac^ 


^JM^./ yu.^.     a-v-^^ctdd^  ,    /'yhya^  i^J-^  ^A^    -^^^-^ 


71 

commencement  and  duration  depend  upon  two  questions 
(l)  Is  Syn.  journey  (Mt.  4  :  12.  Mk.  1  :  14.  Lk.  4:  U\ 
same  as  that  of  John  4,  or  subsequent  to  John  5  ?  (1) 
Was  feast  of  John  5.  1.  Passover,  Pentecost,  Taberna- 
cles, Puriin  ?  Wieseler  has  attempted  to  settle  question 
first  by  historically  making  time  of  John  Bap's  imprison- 
ment coincident  with  feast  of  John  5. 

Discussion  of  Ques.  First.  I.  Those  identifying  jour- 
neys argue.  1.  Motive  assigned  by  Syn.  and  John  for 
Christ's  leaving  Judea  is  similar  (§24.  Mt.  4  :  12,  Mk.  1 : 
14.  Lk.  4:  14.  Jno.  4:  1-3).  Syns.  say  it  was  im- 
prisonment of  John.  John  says  he  was  aware  that  Phari- 
sees knew  that  He  "  made  and  baptized  more  disciples 
than  John  "  (ch.^)jj.  John  had  been  imprisoned  by  Herod 
through  Pharisaic  intrigue.  Hence  Jesus,  as  being  born 
a  greater  object  of  hatred  than  John,  departed  into  Gal. 
to  avoid  persecution.  Two  obj's:  a.  Syn.  do  not  mention 
Pharisees  as  concerned  in  John's  imprisonment.  Ans  : 
True  ;  but  if  not,  wh}'  does  Jesus  leave  Judea  ?  A  pri- 
vate quarrel  between  Herod  and  John  is  no  sufficient  rea- 
son. Jno.  3:  25  certainly  implies  Pharisaic  hostility 
evinced  by  endeavors  to  stir  up  differences  between  John 
and  Jesus.  Jesus'  saying  (4  :  44)  that  "  a  prophet  hath 
no  honor  in  his  own  country  "  (i.  e.  Judea)  declares  hos- 
tility to  himself  and  hence  to  John  as  they  were  engaged 
in  the  same  work.  Objectors  cannot  say  that  Jesus  de- 
parted merely  to  begin  His.  Gal.  work,  for  according  to 
their  own  theory  the  Gal.  Ministry  does  not  begin  till 
after  next  Passover,  b.  If  John  was  imprisoned  by  Herod, 
how  did  Christ  escape  persecution  by  going  to  Gal., 
Herod's  kingdom  ?  Christ's  mission  being  religious,  not 
political.  Ans.  :  He  feared  Pharisees,  acting  upon  Her- 
od's example,  rather  than  Herod.  His  care  even  in  Gal. 
where  their  influence  was  slight,  to  repress  Messianic 
enthusiasm  and  His  reserve  as  to  his  Messiahship,  show 
his  apprehension  of  their  hostility. 

2.  Journey  of  John  4  :  43  is  emphasized  as  though  a 
formal  leaving  of  Judea,  while  the  return  to  Gal.  after 
feast  of  John  5  is  passed  over  without  mention.  Gess. 
characterizes  John  4  :   43  as  comm.  on  Mt.  4  :  14. 

3.  The  discourse  with  Sam.  woman  (John  4)  precisel}' 
accords  with  this  view.  Christ,  rejected  by  the  Jews, 
and  about  entering  on  his  Gal.  ministry,  discloses  the 
universality  of  the  gospel. 


72 

4.  deception  given  Christ  in  Gal.  (John  4  :  45)  implies 
a  formal  beginning  of  His  work  there  of  which  John 
gives  a  specimen  4  :  46-54,  If  His  work  did  not  com- 
mence at  this  time,  if  the  Syn.  account  be  not  inserted 
here,  four  months  from  this  arrival  until  feast  of  John 
5  :  1  are  unaccounted  for,  a  single  miracle  alone  being 
recorded.  5.  At^feastof  John  5,  John  Bapt's  ministry 
is  referred  to  as  past  "(v.  35  ''■loas  a  light"),  hence  his 
imprisonment  and  Christ's  consequent  entering  upon  the 
Gal.  ministry  must  be  placed  before  John  5. 

n.  Those  holding  journeys  of  Syn.  and  John  4  to  be 
different,  argue  :  1.  The  exegesis  of  John  4  :  1  implit»s 
that  John  was  still  at  large^(^vrde  And.  p.  162 ;  Wies.  161  ; 
Gress.  IL  212)  Ans  :  Best  comm.  explain,  "  John  was 
not  as  successful  as  Jesus." 

From  John  4  :  54,  "this  is  again  second  miracle," 
etc.,  which  mention  seems  to  Indicate  that  this  miracle, 
like  the  first  at  Cana,  was  something  out  of  the  ordinary 
course  of  events,  it  has  been  argued  that  the  regular  Gal. 
ministry  had  not  yet  begun.  Ayis  :  The  emphasis  lies 
upon  i/3cov^  i,  e.,  second  miracle  performed  by  Christ 
coming  out  of  Judea  into  Galilee. 

Hostility  of  Pharisees  undeveloped  until  charge  of 
Sabbath-breaking  at  feast  (John  5).  Ans:  Hostility  in 
its  effects  is  certainly  spoken  of  in  ch.  3 :  22  and  4  :  3. 

Unless  Syn.  account  be  introduced  after  John  5,  we 
are  obliged  to  bring  in  after  this  time  a  Passover  not 
mentioned  by  Syn.  Ans:  This  argument  does  not  hold 
{a)  in  measure — Syn  omit  other  feasts,  e.  g.,  Tabernacles 
and  Dedication — u or  (b)  in  inode — it  is  not  their 'plan  to 
record  their  feasts  at  Jerusalem. 

Arguments  2^ro  and  con  nearly  balance..  Compromise 
view  is  held  by  Ellicott  and  Tischendorf,  influenced  by 
Wieseler's  chronology,  who  say  Syn.  journey  and  that  of 
John  4  is  identical,  yet  Syn.  history  does  not  commence 
till  after  John  5.  Ans  :  The  statement  of  Lk.  4  :  14,  "  Je- 
sus returned  in  power  of  Spirit  into  Gal."  is  irreconcilable 
with  this  view  of  four  months  of  inactivity.  Also  state- 
ments intimately  connected  must  be  forcibly  separated 
(Tisch.  in  later  editions  makes  retractions  from  Wieseler's 
scheme  of  chronology.)  Result.  Weight  of  authority 
places  John  Bap.'s  imprisonment  at  John  4,  and  thus 
identifies  journeys  (So  Lange,  Gess.,  Farrar,  Robinson, 
Greswell.) 


J  Va>V-^  LoaXv,  cWto  -vv>oV  ^^ 


\^:^ r^\JK  ^  ^  ^  G^^^  ^  V^cL-cWi 


^^*Wi3L^  r^iUjLAJv    voKtrV^l!^  oxsj  \>u5t^  4    tJ)^oj^)^^'«'v-^ 


73 

Discussion  of  Qaes.  Secomf.  What  was  feast  of  John 
5:1?  (Vide  Chronoloo^y  on  Duration  of  Public  Ministr^^, 
also  Farrar,  Vol.  I.  p.  368  and  Vol.  11.  p.  467  Excursus 
VIII.)  It  the  feast  be  not  Passover  the  Gal.  ministry 
will  be  shortened  by  one  year.  The  method  of  combin- 
ing these  two  central  points  determines  the  entire  Chro- 
nology of  Gospel  History,  and  a  knowledge  of  it  is  a  key 
to  the  understanding  of  any  harmony.  Adjustments  of 
different  harmonists  : 

1.  Robinson  identities  the  journeys  ;  feast  of  John  5, 
he  considers  Passover;  hence,  ministry  in  Eastern  Gal. 
16  months,  in  Northern  Gal.  6  months,  total  Gal.  ministry 
22  months. 

2.  Andrews  places  Syn.  journey  after  John  o:  consid- 
ers feast  Passover;  hence  E.  Gal.  12  months,  IsT.  Gal.  6 
months,  total  Gal.  ministry  18  months.  Christ  inactive 
in  Gal.  4  months  before  John  5  :  1. 

3.  Lichtenstein — places  Syn.  journey  after  John  5, 
/considers  feast  Tabernacles  (in   Oct.  6   months  later)  : 

hence  E.    Gal.   6  months,  N.   Gal.   6   months,   total   Gal. 
jninistry  1  year.     Christ  inactive  10  months. 

4.  Wieseler — places  Syn,  journey  after  John  5  :  con- 
siders feast  Purim  (one  month  before  Passover,  John  6  : 
4  according  to  his  scheme  second  Passover)  :  hence  E. 
Gal.  1  month,  N,  Gal.  6  months,  total  Gal.  ministry  7 
months.  Result  of  this  plan  is  demonstration  of  its  fal- 
sity, giving  but  one  month  to  E,  Gal.  to  which  other 
schemes  give  six  or  twelve.  This  was  most  active  period 
of  Christ's  life  :  time  is  needed  for  development  of  Phar- 
isaic opposition,  for  change  of  popular  sentiment,  for 
growth  of  faith,  for  falling  off  of  the  merely  curious. 
Mission  of  Twelve  alone  would  occupy  more  than  one 
month. 

2.  Lange,  Gess,  Farrar — identify  journeys  ;  consider 
feast  Purim;  avoid  Wieseler's  brevity  in  E.  Gal.  by  be- 
ginning Gal.  ministry  between  John  4,  and  5,  thus  length- 
ening E.  Gal.  to  5  months.  They  synchronize  John  5, 
and  Mt.  11,  also  John  6.  (Second  Passover  according 
to  their  scheme)  and  Mt.  14. 

6.  Ellicott,  Tischendorf,  vide  supra.  "  Compromise 
view." 

General  Result.  Harmony  shows  no  contradiction  in- 
validating the  Gospel  narratives.     Note.     1.  Robinson's 


74 

scheme,  identifying  journeys,  making'  feast  John  5  :  1, 
Passover,  gives  needed  time  in  E.  Gal.  and  accounts  for 
facts.  Individual  bias  eliminated,  we  come  back  to  this' 
scheme. 

2.  In  no  respect  do  these  different  schemes  affect  apol- 
ogetic importance  of  Harmony.  Same  periods,  with  same 
relations,  intentions,  and  order,  occur  in  all.  They  differ 
only  as  to  time  of  beginning  Gal.  ministry,  its  length, 
and  rapidity  of  its  development. 
0—  Order  of  events  during  this  period  of  ministry  in  E. 
Gal  :  Narrative  gathered  from  three  Syn.  who  are  some- 
times parallel,  sometimes  supplemental.  In  obtaining 
chronological  order,  positive  statements,  when  occurring, 
are  to  be  followed,  in  other  circumstances  probabilities 
are  to  be  considered.  The  order  is  more  irregular  be- 
cause of  activity  and  great  ruimber  of  events,  but  the 
commencement  (imprisonment  of  John)  and  close  (feed- 
ing 5000)  are  fixed.  Nothing  following  the  passover  of 
John  6  :  4  is  to  be  included  in  this  period,  for  no  inter- 
change of  events  between  periods  occurs  in  several  gos- 
pels.       _  ^       ^ 

jl  Robinson  arbitrarily  takes  Lk.  11-13  ;  9  t)elonging  to 

;;:      last  journeys  to  Jerusalem  and,  breakitig  up,  inserts,  ii 
j      E.  Gal.     Mk.'s  and  Lk.'s  order  scarcely  disturbed  ;  onh 
I      deviations  Mk.   §§  24,  58,  Lk.  §§  29,  58.     Matt,  mucin 
disturbed  in  adapting  to  their  order.     To  justify,  note 

1.  Mt.  makes  no  statement  as  to  se(juen(!e  in  portions 
changed.  Tots  often  used  loosely  as  connective,  when 
no  consecution  is  intended. 

2.  Mt.'s  gospel  is  topical,  e.  g..  Teaching,  5-7;  Mira- 
cles, 8-9;  Parables,  13.  Chronological  order  general  : 
after  Feeding  5000,  consecutive. 

Characteristics  of  this  period,  are  1.  Activity,  frequent 
journeys,  development  of  plan,  miracres"and  teaching. 
Christ's  greatest  success  iB  achieved;  opposition  is 
aroused.  2.  Preparation  forfonnding  the  church,  rejec- 
tion of  Jews  as  a  nation  being  not  yet  final.  Christ  re- 
news the  offer  of  himself  at  feast  of  John  5. 

Relation  of  Gal.  to  Judean  work.  Jesus'  Messiahship 
and  the  future  church  are  the  subjects  of  both  periods, 
but  in  different  order.  In  Judea  the  prominent  theme 
is  his  Messi^Uship,  in  Gal.  the  church,  also  sacrificial  ele- 
ment enters  from  succeeding  period.     This  blending   ot 


i^ 


75 

the  period  as  record  of  a  siugle  life,  the   best  answer  to 
sceptical  objection  of  irreconcilable  discrepancies. 

Four  sQccessive  subjects  oLthk period  twice  repeated 
are^ 

1.  QrmiozatiLuL^  Call  of  apostles,  that  there  mav  be 
witnesses  of  Christ's  work,  who  shall  found  and  guide 
the  church  after  his  ascension.  2,  MiraeleR.  Attesta- 
tions of  Christ's  divinity.  Xot  arbitrary  works  of  power, 
but  a  regularly  developed  system.  3.  OpposUion.  At 
first_secret,  it  increased  until  Christ  was  driven  from 
Caf>eruaum,  after  which  it  became  the  main  feature  of 
his  life.  4.  Teaching,  a.  E5.t&ftded.  discourses,  b.  Para- 
bles.     (Andr.  divides  arbitrarily  by  ••circuits/') 

These  topics  are  interwoven :  e.  g.  call  of  apostles 
l^orgauization I  is  connected  v\-ith  miracles:  miracles  not 
onlv  attest  divinity,  but  teach  spiritualtroth  :  opposition 
"TsUnked  with  teaching  iJohn  10,7  and  parables  iMt.  21  : 
23-46., »  Teaching  to  some  extent  linked  witk all.  Christ 
is  set  forth  Prophet  (teachijigj,  -Exiest  propitiation .  j 
Kimg  (organization).  2nd  Passover  d'--'  -  ..;.;,-„.-  :.j 
^ZjGaL_iBtQ_  two  parts  ot  4~aucri2  ~  r 

period,  during  which  TTirist's  place  of  work  ;s  .aid  down 
and  developed.  ij_baiis.xif  Gal.  ministry. 

Characteristics  oi  4  months  perio^d.  Choice  of  apostles. 
MiracleSj^  sel ected _ as _  specimens  of  important  classes. 
XTiracles  predominate  over  teaching.  People  are^^rgt 
aroiised,  then  taught. 

^^  5267  Jotm4:  A^6-Ab.  Mt.  4:  17.  Mk.  1:  14,  15.  Lk. 
4 :  14,  15.  Arriial  in  GaliUw  Reception  Christ  was  cor- 
dial, Galileans  having  witnessed  Christ's  miracles  iu 
Jerus.,  (John  ^t:  457  John  4.-14  •'  his  own  country." 
Meyer,  Alford  and  Andrews  ip.  168)  say  GalT  is  meant ; 
others  Xazaretl;,  ^Farrar  Vol.  I.  pp.  219);  best  opinion 
is  Judea,  his  native  country.  Supplemental  character  of 
TfoKlTTgospei  is  seeiTin  TaTTing  Judea  Christ's  country, 
though  not  mentioning  his  birth  there.  Subject  of 
Christ's  teaching:  Kingdom  of  Godai  handy  (Mk.  1 :  15.) 

§27.  John    4:  4&-54.  Xoblenuvts  son   at   Capernaam, 
heakii.     Only  event  recorded  by  John   between  Christ's 
leaving  Judea  to  begin  work  in  Gal.,  and  his  return   to 
2d   Passover.     i5  :  1).     John  Jii3erts_taJ2aiiIia;St-£ailii-iif- 
Gali leans — and  unbelieF'omews. 


76 

f  \.  54.  Emphasis  on  ehJcoi^^  showing  Christ  wrought 
this  cure  "  as  he  ums  c/oing"  to  Gal.  Hence  insert  before 
Syn.   narratives, 

Strauss.  This  miracle  same  as  that  Mt.  8 :  15,  circum- 
stances being  the  same  ;  but  the  differences  are  contra- 
dictions, hence  both  are  false,  mere  mvths  based  on 
Naaman's  being  healed  at  distance  by  Elijah.  Ans: 
The  differences  of  time  and  place,  plainly  prove  two  dis- 
tinct miracles  (Trench  on  Mir.  p.  100). 

§28.  Lk.  4:  16-31,  Mt.  4:  13-16.  Announcement, 
Rejection  at  Nazareth.  Do  Lk.  4  :  16,  Mt.  13  :  54,  Mk.  6  : 
1  as  Lange,  Farrar  and  Lich.  say,  refer  to  the  same 
event  ?  Robinson  and  Andrews  hold  that  these  passages 
record  distinct  occurrences,  because  _L.  Mt.  mentions 
Christ's  removal  from  Naz.  to  Cap.  prior  to  Mt.  13  :  54 
and  Mk.  6  :  1,  Lk.  4  :  28-31,  assigns  his  rejection  at  Naz. 
as  the  reason.  ^.  Lk.  4  :  29,  30,  after  discourse  in  syna- 
gogue, Christ  escaped  death  miraculously;  Mk.  6:  5, 
mentions  Christ  healing  sick  at  Naz.  after  discourse,  thus 
showing  there  was  no  tumult. 

3.  Two  visits  not  impossible.  WonK!  most  probably 
make  his  own  countrynien  more  than  one  offer.  (Conip. 
Andrews,  p.  198.) 

Reas  ■!}  for  Visit.  Christ  first  proclaimed  his  mission 
at  Jerus.,  the  religious  centre  of  God's  chosen  people. 
So  at  the  outset  of  Galilean  ministry  he  affords  his  own 
kinsn)en  earliest  opportunity  of  accepting  him.  Driven 
from  Nazareth,  he  goes  to  Capernaum  (Mt.  4  :  13),  re- 
jected there,  he  returns  to  Nazareth  a  second  time. 
(Matt.  13:  54.) 

Synagogue  usages.  (Farrar  L  p.  220.)  Only  instance 
of  Christ's  reading,  usually  addressed  the  people.  (Cp. 
Acts  13  :  15.)  Christ's  intentions  were  not  revolution- 
ary. He  conforms  to  Jewish  habits.  Sacraments  are 
first  innovations.  First  time  Christ  applies  prophecy  to 
himself.  Is.  61  :  1,  describes  work  and  character  of  Mes- 
siah.    Christ  declares  the  passage  refers  to  himself. 

Contrast.  Christ's  rejection  at  Jerusalem  following 
an  act  symbolizing  judgment  (cleansing  temple) ;  at  Naz- 
areth after  proclaiming  the  gospel.  Gospel  preaching, 
severe  or  mild,  to  natural  man  displeasing.  Hearers  be- 
come suddenly  enraged,  because  Christ  taught  the  com- 
ing rejection  of  Jews  and  calling  of  Gentiles,  illustrating 


M 


^^x-^ 


■<L^ 


77 

this  truth  by  O.  T.  <acts  (I  Kings  17;  2  Kings  5  :  14). 
Blind,  impulsive,  uncontrollable  rage,  not  to  be  explained 
by  proverbial  rudeness  of  Nazarines,  for  Christ's  allu- 
sions to  national  rejection. 

Was  escape  miraculous  ?  Not  so,  some.  Impressive- 
nes9.  (Farrar,  I.,  p.  227.)  But  as  occurred  among  those 
familiar  with  him  supernatural  escape  more  consistent. 
Similar  escapes,  comp.  John  7  :  30  ;  8  :  59  ;   10:  39. 

Lk.  4 :  23.  What  miracles?  1.  Cross  reference  to 
John,  either  2:  12  (some  suppose  miracles  wrought  while 
on  way  to  Ist  Pass.),  or,  2.  Nobleman's  son,  John  4:  46 
—54.  " 

Settled  at  Capernaum  for  at  least  one 3'ear  with  Peter 
or  his  mother.  Selected  because  central,  populous;  Ro-, 
man  garrison;  commerce  in  fish;  on  caravan  route; 
sufficiently  distant  from  Tiberias,  Herod's  capital.  Vide 
Farrar,  T.,'  p.  178.)  Mt.  4:  13,  14,  records  this  as  fulfill- 
ing Is.  9  :  1,  2,  ''  by  way  of  sea." 

Site  of  Capernaum  :  It  lay  in  plain  of  Gennesareth. 
which  was  4  miles  in  length.  Exact  locality  is  unknown  ; 
either  Khan  Minyeh  (Robinson)  or  Tell  Hum  (Farrar,  p. 
181;  Andrews,  pp.  203-220.)  Unmentioned  in  0.  Test. 
Josephus  carried  there  when  wounded.  He  lays  stress 
on  fountains  (Jos.  iii.  10,  §8)  and  fish.  Same  fountains 
at  Khan  Minyeh,  some  say.  Name  Capernaum  (Kefr. 
Nahum,  i.  e.  Village  of  Nahum)  favor^Tell  Hum.  Tell, 
hill,  substituted  for  Kefr,  village  ;  Nahum  abbrev.  Lake 
called  in  O.  T.,  Chinnereth,  Jo^sh..i3  :  27.  "  Harp  shape," 
(Farrar,  I.,  p.  175,  note.)  Sea  of  Galilee,  of  Tiberias, 
Lake  of  Gennesaret,  14  n\i|es  loiig,  6  broad,  600  ft.  below 
Medit'n,  shut  in  by  hills,  abounds  with  fish.  Shores 
thickly  settled,  9  populous  cities.  Tiberhis  and  Magdaia 
alone  remain.  Climate  varied,  both  temperate  and  trop- 
ical ;  vesretation  luxuriant,  fruit  continuous. 

^29.  ^Organization.  Lk.  5  : 1-11 ;  Mt.  4  :  18-22  ;  Mk. 
1  :  16-20.  Call  of  Peter,  And.,  James,  John,  first  act  of 
Gal.  ministry,  that  from  hefpnnwg  Christ  may  have  wit- 
nesses and  teachers. 

Two  theories  of  call.  1.  Naturalistic.  Simply  adhered 
to  Christ  from  choice  as  Bap.'s  disciples.  Gradually, 
more  devoted  and  enthusiastic  attached  themselves  more 
closely  to  his  person.  Ans  :  Contradicts  gospel  narrative. 
Call  is  earliest  act  of  Christ,  showing  foresight  in  select- 


itig  men  best  qualitied  for  his  work.  2.  Mildjiatioiialists 
aiUiiit  eai'ly  call,  accounting  for  it  by,  a,  Christ's  natural 
sagacity;  h.  his  natural  discernment  of  character.  Ans  : 
Inadequate  to  account  for  historical  phenomena. 

Circumstances,  a.  Public,  Lk.  5  :  l,so  validity  of  call 
is  attested.  6,  Selected,  not  from  educated,  prejucliced, 
class,  but  simple  hearted,  best  adapted  for  Christ's  work. 
Their  knowledge  was  to  come  from  inspiration.  Extreme 
poverty  erroneous;  in  good  business, partners, had  "hired 
servants,"  Mk.  1 :  20  ;  "  left  all"  no  sacrifice  unless  some- 
thing left.  Subsequent  poverty  voluntary.  Blunt:  Zeb- 
edee  very  old  at  this  time  and  soon  died.  Comp.  Alt.  8  : 
21  "bury  my  father,"  Mt.  20:  20  ''mother  of  Zebedee's 
children."  Last,  unnatural  if  Z.  alive,  c.  ^tirade  proved 
authority  of  call ;  illustrated  office  and  work  to  be  under- 
taken  :  toll,  patience,  ultimate  success  depending  upon 
God,  then  labor  and  God's  power  to  cooperate.  (Trench, 
miracles,  p.  106.)  Some  symbolize  minutest  details. 
Canon  of  allegorical  interpretation  :  Those  facts  alone 
significant,  originally  intended  to  be  such.  Lk.  places 
call  after  miracles  at  Cap.  (Lk.  4  :  33-41.)  other  Syn. 
before.  Lk.  wishes  to  contrast  rejection  at  Naz.  on  one 
Sabbath,  enthusiastic  reception  at  Cap.  on  the  next. 

Differences.  1.  Mt,,  Mk.  record  no  miracle,  Lk.  omits 
Andrew's  name,  hence  some  say  calls  are  different.  Blit" 
omissions  are  not  contradictions,  and  a  incidents  in  each 
are  same,  b  after  call  both  accounts  say  they  left  all  and 
followed  Christ.  Lk.  records  miracle  wishing  to  show 
deep  impression  on  Peter's  mind. 

2.  Lk.  says,  called  while  in  boat,  one  call  forall.  Mt., 
Mk^n  shore,  mending  nets,  "each  pair  of  brothers  called 
sep^arately.  Harmonize  by  making  these  acts  successive. 
Order,  Christ's  discourse,  miracle,  beckoning  to  other 
boat  for  aid,  call  of  Simon  and  Andrew,  Christ  afterward 
walking  on  shore  finds  Jas.,  John  mending  the  broken 
net  and  calls  them.  (Smith's  Diet.  Peter,  p.  2447,  An- 
drews, p.  228.) 

3.  Syn.  apparently  contradict  John  who  puts  call  3'ear 
previous  (-John  1  :  35)  hence,  say  sceptics,  both  accounts 
mythical.  Ans.  Syn.  don't  say  first  call  ;  "jit_^i^word" 
implies  previous  acquaintance,  readiness  in  leavingl3usi- 
"ness  shows  minds  made  up.     Gospels  give  distinct  stages 

of  organization  in  calling  of  tlie  apostles,     a.  John  1,  calU.^ 


fiaMM^J\r    tcO^-'^^r-   o^-^^L     ^^^U^-pta.     i^-^o-^vuwu    '::t^UL    d-O-t^i^^- 


Coux«^^^^ty^      XUXO        0->->^     Q.X£^    yj^CJt ^•'t^^i;^ 


r— «j      J\^^^Jy.A^/\J    CA^AA^^*^'         UJ-M"^  *\j 


TPJ^Ji    1/tLyktUjr, 

If 


/^'U^'^  .    A^    a^-^^-f-^   ..c^-^^-^-^x^e-^-^j^ 


79 


^Jordan  to  be  learners^  not  required  to  leave  home  or 
reliiiCLiiisb  business,  h.  Lk.  5.  .  To  be  witnesses,  in  con- 
'slant  attendance  on  Christ,  c.  Mk.  3  :  13,  14.  Prior  to 
sermon  on  Mt.  Definite  orw'anization  of  Twelve,  d. 
Lk.  9  :  1-6.  Temj)orarv  commission  conferring  autliority 
to  preach  and  work  miracles.  Full  apostolic  authority, 
not  until  Pentecost.  31iracle  is  an  event  in  external  world 
due  to  immediate  ao;encv  of  God.  (Hodge's  Theol.  Vol. 
I.  p.  618.) 

Some  argue  effect  here  might  be  produced  without 
divine  interference,  by  union  of  second  causes  and  divine 
prescience,  hence  analogous  to  prophecy.  Supernatural 
element  just  as  great  but  strictly  miraculous  element,  i.  e. 
immediate  exercise  of  divine  power,  does  not  enter. 
(Comp.  stater  in  fish's  mouth  Mt.  17  :  27.  Comp.  Ps.  8  : 
8).  Trench  insists  on  this  distinction  :  allow  second 
causes  where  we  can.  But,  1.  These  two  cases  belong  to 
class  of  events  where  Divine  efficiency  is  intended  to  be 
set  forth.  Ordinary  reader  makes  no  distinction.  2. 
Impression  on  mind  of  eye  witnesses  opposes  this  dis- 
tinction. 3.  Symbolical  import  of- miracle  overlooked 
by  this  view.  It  teaches,  God  not  only  foreknows,  but 
his  power- cooperates  with  human. 

-AIiRACLES.  1.  Classifiention.  Some  speak  of  miracles 
of  knowledge,  of  power^  of  love.  But  such  classifica- 
tion is  objectionable,  for,  according  to  definition,  all  mir- 
acles are  acts  of  power.  If  they  are  not  acts  of  Divine 
power  immediately  exercised  they  are  not  miracles.  The 
expression  ".Miracle"  should  be  kept  distinct  and  ap- 
plied to  a  special  class  of  events.  Regeneration,  etc., 
should  not  be  termed  miracle.  Power,  love,  etc.,  may 
however  be  used  to  distinguish  the  main  design  of  the 
miracle. 

2.  Variou-'<  names.  (Vide  Trench  p.  75).  Gospels 
speak  of  a.^^W^^uecaUy-H- token  of  presence  and  working  of 
God.  6.  ^;£^ac,  a_}vonder,  astonishment  of  beholder 
transfeiM^ed  toTthe  work.  '  c.  ^f>v«//£/c,  powersi.  e.  of  God. 

'dref)y(£,  works  i/erof  Divinity. 

3.  Twofold  design  and  proof  of  each.  a.  Attract 
attention  and  impress;  for  always  in  the  presence  of 
witnesses  :  cases  of.popular  sympathy  ;  impression  always 
recorded.  ^Relieve  suffering  ;  for  same  rt?/;t'  might  have 
been'pTi>d1iced   by  miracles  of  different  characters,  i.  e. 


(ilJl^l^'C^J^JL^jM.   ^  4^jj{l^^ 


80 

of  judgment.  Fig-tree  cursed  is  the  only  miracle  of  this 
class.  '^Destruction  of  swine  work  of  demons,  not  of 
Christ,  c.  Teach  truth  ;  they  are  dramatized  parables, 
each  teaching^some^aspect  of  truth. 

They  teach  :  a.  Christ's  power  and  willingness  to  save 
souls  ;  b.  Sinner's  condition  and  way  of  approach,  by 
prayer  and  faith.  Disease  and  death  are  parts  of  the 
penalty  of  sin  inflicted  by  the  curse  of  the  law;  hence 
(T  whence  these  are  removed  a  part  of  the  punishment  of  sin 
is  removed.  Mt.  8  :  16,  17  quoted  from  Is.  53  :  4.c,The 
atonement  also  is  thus  taught,  Christ  bearing  oar  sins. 
d.  AttestChrist's  claims  ;  for  Christ  says  (Lk.'o  :  23,  24) 
"  whether  is  easier  "  .  .  .  "  but  that  ye  may  know" 
etc.  Vide  also  Mt.  11  :  3-5.  Rationalists  say,  "•  if  these 
miracles  were  real,  why  disbelieved  ?"  Ans  :  Abraham's 
answer  is  suflicient,  Lk.  16  :  31. 

Christ's  miracles  (■jjAtx-asted  with  those  of  O.  T.  and  of 
Apostles.  1.  liis  were  performed  by ^  his  ovyn  power. 
Others  were  wrought  in  his  name  or  that  of  God.  It  is 
•  no  fair  exception,  as  Rationalists  declare,  that  Christ  is 
said  to  sometimes  work  "  by  power  of  God,"  "  by  spirit 
of  God,"  "  by  finger  of  God."  There  were  special  rea- 
sons for  Christ's  procedure  on  these  special  occasions. 
Sometimes  also  Christ's  true  humanity  is  expressed  by 
his  faith.  2.  O.  IVmiracles  were  punitive,  those  of  Christ 
were  miracles  of  mercy.  3.  O.T.  miracles  largely  con- 
lined  to  the  sphere  of  nature;  Christ's  were  performed 
in  all  spheres,  the  larger  portion  on  man.  4  O.  T.  mira- 
cles wrought  with  delay  wrestling  in  prayer ;  Christ's 
were  performed  with  ease,  instantaneously. 

The  number  of  Christ's  miracles  must  have  been  in- 
definitely great ;  as  the  cases  recorded  are  mere  speci- 
mens. Vide  Mt.  4  :  24,  8  :  16,  11  :  5,  14  :  2,  15  :  30.  We 
may  imagine  that  no  cases  which  could  be  brought  to 
him  were  not  brought.  Wherever  Christ  went  disease] 
and  death  disappeared.  Thus  was  signified  the  fulnessi 
and  sufficiency  of  Christ's  salvation. 

A  selection  from  this  vast  number  is  made  upon  the\ 
principle  that  each  case  shall  make  prominent  some  new 
phase  of  truth.     When  repeated  it  is  because  of  a  difi'er-  / 
ence  in  method  of  cure,  or  the  effect  upon  the  subject,  or! 
on    account  of  some  new   development  in  the  work  of 
Christ. 


x9  cxUAAH.  C^^'^^yjoh  CWotJyL  /tM^tAJi^  t/^^ocfKMyu^ 


CMy- 


yL<Li3(^ 


81 

Niinilipr  rccQrr[f(l  Some  include  those  of  which  Christ 
was  the  subject,  e.  g.,  birth,  resurrection,  escape  from  pop- 
ulace. Others  include  also  thecase  of  Mary  Magdalene, 
although  it  is  not  mentioned  in  detail.  Omitting  these 
the  number  mav  he  given  as_35.  9  on  external  miture, 
26  of. healing.  ^Vlt.  records  '207Mk."  18,Lk.  2,0,  John  8,. 
^nly  oiLe  IS  cpnimon  to  all  evangelists,  viz.  feeding  of  5,- 
000.  Elevenare  common  to  threCj  yiz._  10  to  Mt.,  Mk. 
and  Lk.  ;  1  to  jVTt.,  Mk.,  John.  S^ix  were  conmion  to  two, 
v'TzTB  to  Mt.rMk.,  2'toMt.,  Lk.,  1  to  Mk.,  Lk.  Mt. 
records  3  alone,  Mk.  2,  Lk.  6,  John  6. 

Far<o«5  principles  of  classification.  1.  With  refer- 
ence to  ^jo^t't'?' displayed  and  sphere  of  exercise;  uj)on 
manj  upon  nature;  inanimate  and  animate  ;  upon  spirit 
world.  2.  By  truths  embodied,  a.  Christ  a  Savior  wnth 
almighty  power,  b.  Character  of  sinner,  blind,  polluted, 
disabled.  3.  By  faith  of  recipient,  whether  personal  or 
intercessory,  strong  or  weak,  that  of  a  Jew  or  Gentile. 
4.  Mode  of  working,  at  hand  or  at  a  distance,  by  word 
or  touch.  It  is  impossible  to  make  a  perfect  classification. 
Theories.  I,  Rationalistic.  Miracles  are  impossible. 
Those  seemingly  miraculous  occurrences  alone  took  place 
phich  may  be  explained  naturally.  A  distinction  is  made 
between  miracles  of  healing  and  those  in  which  nature 
is  the  subject  of  Christ's  power.  The  former  are  admit- 
ted because  they  may  be  naturally  explained;  the  latter 
are  detiied  because  inexplicable.  Their  presence  in  the 
narrative  is  accounted  for  upon  the  nii/thical  hypothesis. 
Paulus:  Jesus  was  a  physician,  having  acquired  his  art 
from  ihe  Essenes;  he  gave  prescriptions;  a  list  of  medi- 
cines is  enumerated  from  contemporaneous  authors. 
Celsus  :  Christ  performed  miracles  by  means  of  magical 
arts  learned  in  Egypt.  Renan  :  Christ  performed  mira- 
cles against  his  \x\\\.  Popular  expectation  as  to  the  Mes- 
siah compelled  him  to  become  a  wonder-worker.  Hence 
his  miracles  were  mere  deceptions. 

Ans:  The  Scripture  narrative  represents  Christ  as 
working  without  means,  and  producing  by  word  alone 
instantaneous  effects. 

II.  Psycliologico-Ethical.    Christ's  miracles  the  result 

of  animal  mag'neHsm  ;  due  simply  to  the  influence  of  mind 

■over"the~l)octilv'  condition.     The  theory  is  based  upon 

observed  fiicts,'^proving  «,  a  mysterious  influence  of  mind 


82 

over  mind,  and,  h,  the  influence  of  mind  and  will  over 
body.  In  support  of  this  view,  1.  Thev  argue  from 
Scripture,  that  faith  was  required  in  all  cases  in  the  recip- 
ient or  the  cure  could  not  be  performed,  e.  g.,  no  miracles 
in  Nazareth  "  because  of  unbelief,"  Mt.  13  :  58.  In  Gal. 
generall}'  the  people  were  in  sympathy  with  him,  lience 
he  could  perform  miracles.  2.  Stress  is  laid  on  Christ's 
human  sympathy,  his  commanding  presence,  his  superior 
spirituality.  Thus  he  projected  himself  into  the  con- 
sciousness of  others.  Some  miracles,  e.  g.,  raising  of 
dead,  healing  of  congenital  blindness,  cure  of  leper,  can- 
not be  thus  explained.  Hence  some  are  rejected.  As  to 
others,  it  is  said  that  Christ  merely  declared  a  cure  al- 
ready wrought. 

Strauss  :  Derogatory  to  make  Christ's  success  depend 
not  on  teaching  but  on  momentary  power.  Character  of 
Jesus  is  weighted  down  with  these  cures.  O.  T.  records 
cures,  therefore  Christ  performed  some,  but  only  when 
he  could  not  avoid  so  doinff.  Stress  laid  on  "  siijn" 
being  asked  for,  hence  no  miracles  performed.  "  Sign 
of  Jona"  referred  to  the  preaching  of  Jonah.  Christ 
commanded  the  disciples  of  Ba[>tist  to  report  to  him  the 
spiritual  results  of  his  work — not  real  mira<;Ies — when  he 
said  "the  blind  see,"  etc.,  Mt.  11 :  4,  o. 

Strauss  rejects  all  miraculous  cures  ;  all  miracles  with 
accompanying  conversations  ;  miracles  introduced  later 
to  ex[)!ain  the  conversation  ;  all  mentioned  as  occurring 
twice;  all  to  which  there  are  analogous  parables — the 
allegory  transformed  by  later  writers  into  a  miracle. 
Thus  the  numbei-  is  reduced,  the  residuum  is  explained 
away. 

^  All  such  writers  are  ixivolved  in  tliefollowingdilemma: 
either  Christ  is  a  mere  enthusiast,  not  above  the  people, 
or  a  conscious  deceiver.  In  either  case  how  could  Christ 
be  a  moral  teacher,  the  author  of  the  Christian  religion  ? 
Yet  this  they  hold. 
<r'  §30.  Mk."  1  :  21-38.  Lk.  4  :  31-37.  Healing  Demoniac 
in  Synagofiue.  Lk.  says  Christ's  lirst  Sabbath  in  Cap'm  ; 
next  atter  rejection  at  ISTazareth.  Taught  in  Synag.  with 
autltoritg  ;  during  service  healed  demoniac.  Miracles  of 
dispossession  peculiar  to  N.  T.  Jdcfjicou,  da^fioviov,  in 
Homer=??£oc ;  in  later  Gk.  (Plato)  beings  intermediate 
between  God  and  man  ;  Philoand  Josephus,  souls  of  men. 


J^  /yCl  i^yytrrtA  'Ziu^    ^^^uyx^n     CUuy  C^itJ&rM    XyoA^Mj  "^^^-^ 


_^^,^  ^..  ....  ...^.....^  %  .^'^.^^ 


-CAj^yLJl        0't.-i^-~^a^ 


-u-t—^    tcijL.    \A^'^-^-'<^^(^^~h-ii--'^-.-<^^ 


83 

especiallj'  the  wicked  ;  Socrates,  good  spirit,  tutelar  di- 
vinity ;  LXX.,  heatlien  idols,  hence  Paul  (I  Cor.  10  :  19), 
heathen  sacrifice  to  oainovio..  E.  V.  '-devils"  incorrect, 
t]ai:440LJIL_kll.t^pi\?_^'«j^<;^^'«C  His  servants  are  demons. 
(Smith's  Dic'y,  Demons,  p.  583.)  (Demoniacs,  Trench, 
p.  125.     Neander's  Life  Christ,  pp.  145-151.) 

Design  of  this  class  of  miracles  is  to  exhibit  man  as  by 
nature  the  helpless  bond-slave  of  Satan,  and  Christ  as  the 
only  one  able  to  effect  his  deliverance.     While   Christ] 
was  upon  earth  peculiar  license  seems  granted   to   evili 
spirits.     His  power  over  them,  besides  attesting  his  di-t 
vinity  was  fulfillment  of  the  Protevangelium.     Gen.  3  :\ 
15.     Seven  cases  (including  Mar}'  Magdelene)j)||^ demon-' 
iacal  posession  are  recorded.        '        "~ 
"yrObJTcUons.     1.   Phenomena    of  possession    contradict 
consciousness.     Will  is  free.     It  cannot  be  so  wholly  con- 
trolled   by  an   unseen    being,  much    less    could   several 
demons  possess  oi>e  man.     Aiis.   We  must  not  look  to 
consciousness  for  information  respecting  facts  outside  the 
sphere  of  consciousness.     Scripture  teaches  Stan  has  ac- 
cess  to   minds  of  men,  to  lead  them  captive  at  his  will. 
Possession   must   have   accorded   with   their  nature  and 
ours. 

2.  Possession  not  recorded  elsewhere  in  Scripture  and 
does  not  now  occur :  Ans.  Latter  position  cannot  be 
proved.  Special  propriety  of  such  cases  at  time  of  Christ ; 
culmination  of  the  conflict  between  the  kingdoms  of 
good  and  evil,  Saul  is  an  instance  found  in  O.  Test.  3. 
No  curse  of  this  kind  mentioned  in  John  but  all  are  in 
Gal.  J.«s.  Silence  proves  nothing.  John  does  introduce 
the  obnoxious  doctrine.  John  8  :  48,  "  hast  a  devil," 
13  :  27,  "  after  the  sop  Satan  entered  into  him."  John 
records  only  miracles  introducing  long  discourses,  hence 
these  omitted.  4.  Demoniacal  possession  is  analogous  to 
mania,  idiocy,  epilepsy,  etc.,  hence  mere  nervous  affec- 
tions controllable  by  will  power.  Jesus,  possessing  great 
personal  magnetism,  wrought  these  apparently  miracu- 
lous cures.  Ans.  Mythicaftheory  here  is  inconsistent; 
aiming  to  prove  the  gospels  myths,  it  admits  that  narra- 
tive of  these  cures  relates  actual,  historical  events,  hence 
becomes  Naturalistic.  Dogmatic  theory  of  Baur.  Vic- 
tory of  Christ  over  heathenism  set  forth  under  this  sym- 
bolic form.     Accommodation  Theory.     Spinoza:  Christ, 


84 

though  not  sharing  popular  superstitions,  accommodated 
himself  to  them,  by  acting  as  though  the  cases  of  pos- 
session were  real,  while  he  knew  they  were  only  appar- 
ent. Christ's  literal  words  are  parabolic.  Ans  :  a.  This 
view  irreconcilable  with  Christ's  character,  as  portrayed 
by  those  who  hold  it.  It  charges  him  with  conscious 
deception.  6,  Christ's  language  is  not  hypothetical,  but 
explicit.  Separate  personality  of  demons  is  evident,  for 
Christ  distinguishes  demon  from  the  person  possessed, 
addresses  them,  they  answer,  when  cast  out  man  becomes 
as  other  men,  they  enter  herd  of  swine,  &c.  (Vide  Ebr'd, 
p.  251,  Farrar,  L,  p.  236,  note). 

Christ  silenced  {(fcixwi}r^7c  =  hQ  muzzled)  demon's  testi- 
mony (Lk.  4  :  34,  35)  because,  a,  He  would  not  accept 
testimony  of  such  a  witness.  /;,  To  permit  such  a  title, 
"Holy  One  of  God,"  at  this  stage  of  his  work  would 
have  precipitated  Pharisaic  hostility.  Prominent  fea- 
tures of  dispossession  :  loud  voice,  crying,  bodily  pros- 
tration. Effect  :  Christ's  authority  established  ;  his 
fame  spread  abroad;  attention  attracted  to  his  preachino:. 
(Mark  1  :  27-28.) 

§31.  Matt.  8  :  14-17  ;  Mk.  1  :  29-34  ;  Luke  4  :  38-41. 
Peter's  Wife's  Mother.  This  miracle  wrought  sajne^day 
as  preceding.  Mt.'s  }>lan  being  topical,  not  chronolog'l, 
this  is  grouped  with  otlier  miracles  in  ch.  8.  Disease, 
great  "  fever,"  nujiirrj  ficYd/,aj  being  medical  phrase,  it  has 
been  inferred  Luke  was  physician,  and  had  personal 
knowledge  of  the  case.  Fever  probably  signifies  general 
disability  of  sinner  joined  with  burning  restlessness  of 
sinful  desires.  Mode  of  cure  :  Christ  stood  over  her 
(Lk.),  took  her  hand,  lifted  her  up  (Mk.)  and  rebuked 
the  fever  (Lk.)  Note  completeness  of  cure;  no  weak- 
ness, nor  gradual  convalescence,  but  "immediately  she 
arose  and  ministered  unto  them."  (Trench  on  Mir.,  p. 
li'2.) 

Sceptics  argue  from  '•'rebuked  fever,"  either  possession 
is  ordinary  disease,  or  fever  is  possession.  Ans  :  Use  of 
figurative  language  is  overlooked.  This  is  an  isolated 
case — fever  personified  ;  it  does  not  answer  or  cry  out. 
Comp.  Christ's  command  to  winds,  "  Peace,  be  still." 

This  is  first  time  Peter  is  distinguished  above  the 
other  apostles ;  miracle  worked  in  his  own  family.  Com- 
pare "  wife's  mother,"  Mk.  1  :  30  and  1  Cor.  9  :  5.     Mk. 


C^u^"-^ 


ci^r^  oUaJL  tc  cdux-^^^y^^,^  ,0.^    «.--<_X?fx  Q£lajl^I>    .hjUj^Kiu- dda 

^Vva-<^-»-o^      ]^-<^     cLo-'LM     'V^.<J^k    ctLLS-J^^f^-i-^  , 

^^  .xaX-    oc^.--^^  ^M>-^t^A/    (Ltr-tH^^    -Aey^y  a^la-^-^Ho  , 

4-^€lyC^oC,ec_,     -0.<aA^  Kb^aJ?_^    itCe^    0<-^ia<^    yt.yt^    KLceAn^        Jb4^  /i^A^-cc^ 


,J^;/v£vJc^  '^dH.^^     t^-^-^-^y     .«i-tWc      -^.JL^..^.-^^      ..a-^iy^..^^.^-^^..^   , 


C^A  .^^<^.-^^'^    l^i^^cU^^^      ^    "^^^^^  q/^^^-y^..     a.{f.(O.^H.t^ 


^^je-,   /^    ..^...^J-^     Lo-r -vxA^A>^     ^^X/vwte^A^    ivA>i;UMVa^. 


85 

1  :  32,  33,  says  at  sunset,  whole  city  brought  sick  to 
Christ.  Some  say,  waited  until  evening,  because  unlaw- 
ful to  heal  on  Sabbath,  but  that  objection  not  yet  raised. 
Observe  that  it  is  tirst  proposed  by  Pharisaic  emissaries 
from  Jcrus'm.  True  explanation,  cool  of  evening  proper 
time  to  move  the  sick.  This. Sabbath^a  specimen  day. 
C rowels  seek  hira.next  morning.  Note  "all  tha^were 
diseased^"  contrasted  with  "them  possessedTA-ith  devils," 
W^.  1  :  32.  Hence  possession  differs  from  ordinary  dis- 
ease 

§32.  Mk.  1:  35-39;  Lk.4:  42-44;  Mt.  4:  23-25.  Ftrst 
Circuit  in  Galilee.  Mk.  1 :  38,  39,  contains  Christ's  iirst 
intimation  of  future  plan  of  labor.  Taken  in  connection 
with  disciples'  statement  v.  37,  it  te.iches  his  work  was 
not  stationary.  Cap.  being:  selected  merely  as  headquar- 
ters. It  is  conjectured  this  circuit  very  brief,  but  a  week, 
a  single  miracle  being  recorded.  Christ's  work  itinerant 
and  thorough  (Mk.  1:  39,  "synagogues  in  all  Galilee"). 
Christ's  method,  teaching  in  synagogues;  his  doctrine, 
"  kingdom  of  God,"  "  gosj)el  of  the  kingdom."  Xote 
Christ's  habit  of  private  devotion,  Mk.  1  :  35. 

§33.  Mt.  8:2-4;  Mk.  1  :  40-45  ;  Lk.  5  :  12-16.  Heal- 
ing Leper.  Ebrard,  Trench,  Lange,  follow  Mt.'s  order: 
Uobinson,  Lk's,  who  more  carefully  observes  chronolog. 
sequence.  Ten  lepers  only  recorded  cure  of  this  disease 
(Lk.  17:  12).  These  two  instances  are  only  specimens. 
Comp.  Mt.  10:  8;  11:  5;  Lk.  4:  27;  Lk.  7^:  22.  Jose- 
phus  notes  current  slander  that  Jews  driven  from  Egypt 
because  ot  leprosy.  Two  kinds  of  leprosy,  a.  Elephan- 
tiasis. (Job),  b.  White  Leprosy,  kind  mentioned  in  Leviti- 
cus and  g.)spels.  Ceremonial  law.  Lev.  13.  Sult'erer 
clothed  in  mourning,  with  head  bare  and  garments  rent. 
When  pronounced  clean,  ceremonies  occupying  a  week 
were  requisite  and  ^11  classes  of  sacrifice.  Import  of 
these  requirements.  Two  views.  1.  Michaelis  and  Ra- 
tionalistic School  say  were  civil  acts  to  prevent  spread 
of  contagion,  and  for  social  protection.  Ans:  a.  Dis- 
ease was  "hereditary,  but  probably  nor  contagious,  e.  g., 
Naaman,  general  of  Syrian  army.  (2  Kings  5  :  1).  Ge- 
hazi  couv'ersed  with  king  of  Israel  (2  Kings  8  :  5), 
(Trencli  on  Mir.  p.  174).  b.  This  view  does  not  account 
for  the  religious  rites,  or  sense  of  moral  impurity  attach- 
ing to  this  disease. 


86 

2.  True  view.  Leprosy  selected  as  most  appropriate 
type  of  nature  of  sin  ;  liereditary,  spreading  from  single 
spot  over  entire  body,  incurable  by  human  agencies, 
loathsome.  Lepers  were  thought  smitten  by  God. 
Hence  Vulg.  renders  Is.  53:  4  '■'■quasi  Icprosum,"  giving 
rise  to  idea  that. Christ  was  to  be  a  leper.  (Farrar  Vol. 
I.  p.  149).  So  Talmud  and  early  church,  hence  disease 
an  honor. 

Christ  healing  leprosy  typified  his  abilitj-  to  save  from 
sin.  Sj'mbolic  nature  af  this  disease  is  seen  in  form  of 
leper's  request,  to  be  cleansed,  not  healed,  and  in  Christ's 
answer  "Be  thou  clean."  Christ  touched  the  leper, 
although  contrary  t(j  Mosaic  law.  Lev.  13  :  24-46  ;  Num. 
0  :  2.  Shewing  that  in  his  saving  work  he  shrinks  from 
no  man  however  polluted.     (Farrar  Vol.  I.  p.  275). 

Leper  commanded  to  shew  himself  to  priests  (Lev. 
14:4).  a.  To  gain  official  recognition  of  cure.  b.  To 
exhibit  his  relation  to  the  law.  Christ  enjoins  secresy 
(Mk.  1:44).  Objection — cure  wrought  in  presence  of 
multitudes,  hence  secresy  impossible.  Lange,  Fari'ar, 
Andrews,  cure  wrought  in  presence  of  but  few.  Grotius, 
Bengel,  Alexander,  injunction  limited  to  time  between 
cure  and  shewing  himself  to  priests.  (Trench  on  Mir.  p. 
180.)  Better  opinion  :  Christ  intended  to  repress  fanati- 
cal enthusiasm,  which  would  hinder  liis  work.  He  would 
subordinate  works  to  word.  He  would  not  attract  peo- 
ple as  mere  miracle-worker,  but  as  Saviour.  (Andrews 
p.  235.  Farrar  Vol.  I.  277).  Man  disobeying  and  spread- 
ing report,  (Mk.  1  :  45).  Christ  was  forced  to  avoid  all 
centres  of  population  because  of  undue  popular  zeal. 
Supposition  that  Christ's  retirement  was  caused  by  cere- 
monial uncleanness,  is  fanciful.  Naturalistic  view. 
Schenkel.  Leprosy  could  not  be  healed  b}'  will  power; 
hence  man  was  nearly  well,  Christ  observing  this,  simply 
announced  it. 

§34.  Opposition.  Mk.  2:  1-12;  Lk.  5:  17-26;  Mt. 
19:  2-8.  Healing  Paralijtic  on  Christ's  return  to  Cap'ra 
after  Gal.  circuit.  Head  Mt.  9 :  1  as  conclusion  of  ch.  8 
and  follow  Mk.'s  order.  Mt.  grouping  miracles  places 
this  as  though  wrought  upon  Christ's  return  from  coun- 
try of  Gergesenes. 

This  class  of  diseases  exhibits  the  lielplessness  of  sin- 
ner.    In  healing  them  Christ  always  commands  patient 


C^  '?.-^^,c^,-x..^^    Z^:^    <L^tl^^^     jLa^^y^  €^t>C—   7f.,:^-^fr>,^ty^i.^ 
o2.5-^Lx.-<-^L-  AxJo^-A-^    (ImJUIA/  <xXIjL^<-'-^^»'^-~    ^    a^-ut.-v-^.M^<$^€U-^^     VxA\ 


87 

to  niave  the  part  paralyzed,  thus  setting  fortli  nature  and 
power  of  true  faith.  Christ's  command  "  Be  clean,"  in 
last  miracle,  emphasizes  pollution  of  sin,  "arise  and 
walk,"  its  power.  Mk.  2  :  1,  iv  dcxto  "  at  home,"  not  "  in 
the  house."  Observe  new  step  in  teaching,  by  miracles. 
Christ  addresses  man,  "Thy  sins  be  (correctly, /wre  6m?, 
dipeojuza:,  Doric  perf.  pass.,  notsubj.)  forgiven  "thee,"  thus 
directing  attention  away  from  mere  external  result  to  its 
spiritual  signification. 

Some  falsely  infer  from  Christ's  address  that  the  palsy 
was  due  to  sinful  indulgence,  or  that  Christ  accommo- 
dates himself  to  idea  that  all  suffering  was  direct  punish- 
ment of  specific  sin.  Scribes  and  Pharisees  secretly 
charge  Christ  with  blasphemy.  They  were  right  in 
supposing  God  alone  could  forgive  sins,  wrong  in  not 
accepting  proofs  of  Christ's  divinity. 

Emphasis  of  Christ's  reply  (Lk.  5  :  23)  rests  on  "  sa^" 
i.  e.  claim  to  be  able.  The  former  claim  any  one  might 
make,  the  latter  is  more  difficult  of  proof.  At  Christ's 
word  tlie  man  is  healed.  People  are  astonished  and 
glorify  God.  v.  24.  Revelation  of  conscious  divinity. 
New  element:  Pharisaic  op[)osition.  While  people  wel- 
come Christ  with  enthusiasm  Pharisees,  for  first  time, 
raise  opposition  in  Gal.  This  opposition  was  due  to 
influence  of  Pharisees  at  Jerus,  and  though  not  oflicially 
sanctioned  l)y  them,  shows  they  were  carefully  watching 
Christ's  movements. 

§35.  Mt.  9  :  9  ;  Mk.  2  :  13,  14  ;  Lk.  5  :  27,  28.  Call 
of  Matthew.  Call  of  Mt.  to  be  Christ's  apostle  is  related 
to  development  of  Pharisaical  opposition,  in  the  fact,  Mt. 
was  publican  and  specially  obnoxious  to  this  sect.  (An- 
drews p.  288.)  The  feast  of  Levi  (Mt.)  did  not  occur  at 
this  time  because,  1.  Twelve  were  with  Christ  at  feast,  at 
call  Mt.  All  not  yet  chosen.  2.  Feast  interrupted  by 
message  of  Jairus.  RaisingofJairus' daughter  occurred 
subsequent  to  Christ's  return  from  G?dara.  Mt.'s  call 
previous  to  this.  3.  Breach  with  Pharisees  too  marked 
for  this  early  period. 

Mk.  and  Lk.  relate  under  exactly  similar  circumstan- 
ces, call  of  Levi,  3^et  in  their  lists  of  apostles  mention  no 
Levi,  but  Matthew.  Levi  was  probably  original  name, 
changed  upon  becoming  apostle.  Comp.  Simon  changed 
to    Cephas.       (John    1  :  42.)      Matthew  "  gift  of  God." 


^: 


88 

Publican  hateful  to  Jews,  being  constant  reminder  of 
Roman  domination,  and  taking  advantage  of  his  position 
to  practice  great  extortion.  Humility  of  Alt.  seen  in 
fact,  he  alone  records  his  name  as  "  tlie  publican."  Mt. 
10  :  3,  (Farrar,  Vol.  I,  p.  245.)  For  sceptical  inferences, 
vide  Ebrard,  p.  265. 

§36.  John  5  :  1-47.  Second  Passover.  Galilean  work 
is  here  interrupted  by  a  brief  visit  to  Jerus.  to  attend 
feast.  Hostility  of  Pharisees  compels  Christ's  speedy 
return  to  Gal.  not  s^oing  again  to  Jerus.  for  eio-hteen 
months. 

Reasons  for  inserting  John  5,  here.  1.  Lk.  §37  gives 
note  of  time  viz.  [(Tai3,'-idT(o  dzureooTzptozco].  Text  here  is 
doubtful,  interpretation  uncertain,  the  adjective  never 
occuring  elsewhere.  Wieseler  suggests  the  reference  is 
to  '-'■  first  Sabbath  in  the  secom/of  the  cycle  of  seven  x-ears, 
which  completed  the  sabbatical  period."  Wetstein,  "  the 
first  sabbath  of  the  second  month." 

Andrews  explains  with  reference  to  annual  feasts. 
First  Sabbath  after  Passover  \\i\^  first  first  Sabbath  ;  first 
after  Pentecost  was  second — first  Sabbath ;  first  after 
Tabernacles  was  third — first  Sabbath  :  Conip.  modern 
usage — first  Sunday  after  Epiphany,  first  after  Easter, 
first  after  Trinity,  &c.     (Andrews,  p.  241.) 

Scaliger,  Evvald,  Keim,  Robinson,  etc.,  suppose  this 
sabbath  to  be  the  first  after  the  second  day  of  Passover, 
from  which  the  fifty  days  to  Pentecost  were  counted  ; 
the  Sabbaths  of  this  interval  being  numbered,  the  first 
Sabbath  after  second  day,  third  Sabbath  after  second  day, 
etc.     (Andrews  p.  240.     Lightfoot  on  Mt.  12  :  1.) 

Last  view  is  to  be  preferred,  it  being  the  only  explana- 
tion appealing  to  popular  usage  :  likely  that  such  a  term 
would  be  current  with  the  masses.  2.  Agrees  best  with 
season  of  year.  Standing  corn  ripe  enough  to  be  pluck- 
ed and  eaten.  This  could  not  be  befi)re  Passover,  being 
the  time  for  ottering  first  fruits.  3.  Results  obtained. 
The  occurrences  of  this  feast,  if  introduced  here,  harmo- 
nize precisely  with  Syn.  narrative.  The  agreement 
amounts  almost  to  demonstration.  A  connected  account 
of  the  development  of  Pharisaic  opposition,  is  furnished, 
three  successive  instances  being  noted,  viz.  its  outbreak, 
at  the  healing  of  paralytic,  §34,  its  growth  at  Christ's 
call   of  the   publican,  §35,  its  increasing  dcfiniteness  at 


'}Z^      U.S^c.i>^       t/t^-O-^l-O'C^     i:2.<?-<g^i^      -CCZyL^      ^^if/t-'^Jl      yCA^-U.^     tCo-^CK^ 


*{?• 


Pasisovor.  §06.  At  lii^r  ;v..>i  vi  .*^•ii^  5  :  1,  I'or  liie  fii^?t 
time,  Christ  is  chargeii  with  Sabbath  breaking.  In  the 
Svn.  narrative  the  same  eha^g^e  taken  np  and  pressed  by 
his  e!  eni'es  in  Gal.  The  iuierenee  is  unavoidable,  that 
Jo'  -  be  inserteii  here.     The  supposition    that 

ttt  '.  ..rist   went   up   to   the  J'assover  and   was 

there  o|:.enly  charged  with  being  a  Sabbath-breaker,  by 
the  Jews.  Pharisees,  the  highest  religions  authorities, 
gives  the  best  and  only  adequate  explanation  of  the  in- 
tr*  it   by  the  Syn.  of  the  same  charge, 

as  .  _       -:  him  by  the  Pharisees  of  Gal.  Christ 

bad  f»reviousiy  wrought  many  cures  in  Gal.,  on  Sabbath, 
aud  even  in  the  Synagt^gues,  without  Pharisees  making 
slightest  opposition,  but  their  bitter  p»ersecution  of  him 
on      '-  _  ^forward,  admits  of  easy  exp»lanation, 

wl.  c>hn  5,  that  Jerus.  Pharisees  attempt 

to  <  .ise  of  a  Sabbath  cure.     4.  Gal.  ministry 

be,:  :i  .  ^n  4.  Where  can  John  5,  be  inserted  ? 
This  the  only  palace. 

Site  of  Bethsaida  cannot  be  accurately  determined. 
It  was  near  Sheep  Gate  (i.  e.  market),  which  was  toward 
the  X.  E.  of  the  city.  Robinson  identifies  with  small 
intermittent  spring  called  fount  of  the  Virgin.  Objected 
to,  as  not  iar^^e  enough  for  the  five  porches,  and  multi- 
tude of  "  sick  folk-"' 

Weight  of  authority  rejects  v.  3  (latter  clause)  aud 
whole  of  V.  4.  Wanting  in  B,  D,  and  Sinaitic.  luter- 
Dal  arguments  against  its  genuineness  are,  1.  Xever  al- 
loded  to  elsewhere.  If  such  spring  existed,  its  fame 
woold  be  world  wide.  2.  Wholly  out  of  analogy  with 
miracles  of  O.  andX.  T.  Xo  spiritual  truth  is  connected 
with  it,  to  be  believed  or  attested.  Angelic  agency  never 
recorded  as  working  miracles  elsewhere.  (Farrar  Vol. 
L  p.  372.  S<<xe.  1  In  favor  Text  Recept,  Owen  on  John, 
in  loco.     Reference  to  angel  is  variously  interpreted. 

1.  Literal.  The  text  accepted  with  all  its  difficulties, 
on  srroaud,  that  narrative  is  not  impossible.  2.  Xatural- 
i^ibt.  Hengatenberg,  Robinson.  Spring  simply  medici- 
nal, it^'properties  due  to  angelic  agency,  but  the  cure  not 
always  immediate,  nor  all  cured. 

3'  .^1  \     Take  arfjOjj'Z  in    etymological    sense, 

-•mess-    _  ben   spring  is  spoken   of  figuratively  as 

God's  messenger-  4.  B^M.  Reject  the  doubtful  verses, 
and  the  difficultv  vanishes  with  them. 


90 

Sabbath  observance  was  test  question.  By  it  the  Jews 
were  distinguished  from  Gentile  nations.  It  was  the 
chief  mark  oftlieir  national  and  theocratic  iidelity.  At 
time  of  Christ  the  ascendancy  of  mere  ritual  was  such, 
that  its  spiritual  observance  was  scarcely  known.  Innu- 
merable, minute  and  absurd  regulations,  had  taken  the 
place  of  the  Mosaic  law.  It  v,-as  with  this  dead  formality, 
that  Christ  came  constantly  into  conflict,  and  on  account 
of  it  was  so  repeatedly  charged  with  Sabbath  breaking. 
(Farrar  Vol.  I.  p.  430," §5).  \'v.  16-18.  Jews  "sought  to 
slay  him."  Many  regard  this  as  ofiicial  sentence  of  Sanhe- 
drim, and  Christ's  discourse  (v.  19-47)  a  defence  de- 
livered before  them,  ISTo  evidence  that  this  was  the  case  ; 
the  murderous  purpose  to  kill  Christ  is  now  found,  a 
pretext  on  which  to  base  it  is  obtained,  but  the  formal  de- 
cree to  slay  him  is  made  some  months  later. 

Christ's  discourse  contains  clear  and  profound  state- 
ment of  his  relations  to  the  Father.  In  Syn.  he  presents 
only  popular  arguments.  Lessons  of  the  discourse:  1. 
God  works  ceaselessly.  Sabbath  (^ommemt^rates  rest 
from  creation,  not  cessation  from  all  work.  2.  Christ's 
work  identical  with  God's,  not  mere  imitation,  and  is 
based  upon  his  immediate  perfect  knowledge  of  the 
Father.  3.  Christ  the  source  of  life,  and  the  judge  of 
all.  Resurrection  and  judgment  referred  t(x  Eternal 
generation  taught.  4.  Necessity  and  responsibility  ot 
exercising  faith  in  himself;  rejecting  hitn  is  to  reject 
God.  Rage  of  Jews  aroused  because  he  claimed  God  as 
his  Father,  "  making  himself  equal  with  God."  The 
Pljarisees,  therefore,  understood  Christ  as  claiming 
divinity. 

Strauss  alleges  disci'epancy  in  the  gospel  narrative  of 
the  development  of  opposition  to  Christ  on  the  ground, 
that  Syn.  made  its  growth  gradual,  occasioned  by  Sab- 
Inith-breaking,  while  Jolm  traces  it  to  Christ's  teaching 
concerning  his  person,  causing  sudden  outbreak. 

Ans:  This  discrepancy  much  exaggerated.  All  four 
evangelists  make  the  origin  of  organized  o|tposition.  Sab- 
bath-breaking. All  difference  in  their  accounts  of  its 
development  is  due  to  the  characteristic  diflerenee  of 
Christ's  ministry  in  Judea  and  Gal.  In  Judea  his  great 
desigim  was  to  manifest  himself  plainly  to  Jews  as  Mes- 
siah :  in  Gal.  to  instruct  believers  who  should  oro-anize 


fj   7^0(^1-  /uuA^  -^^r-f-t---*-^  '2ly<^'^'^<^'<^^ 


c?y^  ^  i^  1rt  ^^s^/^^^J.^^    a_^^  cu 


iyU-i 


(7 


OC^^c-^    p^^UA^^^ 


-QXJ 


''2^i.-t-.-(iL^\ 


/O!^.-^ 


a-UL,^^jL.-^L-<^'«.y^Ly<^ 


^^.y. 


Lo-U--^^ 


•^ 


-c^ily 


%. 


91 

the  church  ;  in  Jiulea  he  had  to  deal  with  the  rulers,  his 
enemies  :  in  Gal.  with  the  people  who  heard  him  gladl_y. 

Christ's  allusions  to  John  Bap.'s  testimonj-  as  already 
past  (v.  35)  streno^thens  the  view  that  Gal.  ministry  be- 
iJ^an  previous  to  John  5. 

§37.  Mt.  12:  1-8;  xMk.  2:  23-28;  Lk.  6:  1-5.  Pluck- 
irtfj  Corn  on  the  Sabbath.  This  incident  occurred  first  Sab- 
bath after  Passover,  while  Christ  was  travelling,  either 
to  visit  different  synagogues,  or  more  likely-,  hastening 
from  Jerus.  back  to  Gal.  to  escape  impending  persecution. 

Conduct  of  ^liarisees  now  changes.  Hitherto  their 
hostility  had  been  secret,  henceforward  their  emissaries 
follow  Christ,  striving  to  harass  him,  and  destroy  his  in- 
fluence. Plucking  the  corn  was  sanctioned  by  Mosaic 
law  (Deut.  23:  25.)  Christ  replies  to  the  charges  of  the 
Pharisees  with  five  arguments.  1.  David's  eatino^  shew 
bread.  (I.  Sam.  21 :  1-7.)  Point  of  comparison  between 
this  case  and  Christ's  is  the  breaking  of  law.  Law  of 
Sq,bbath  and  law  of  sanctuary  derived  their  authority 
not  from  their  essential  holiness  but  from  God  alone,  and 
if  in  certain  circumstances  it  was  just  for  a  man  to  break 
the  one,  why  might  it  not  be  lawful  to  break  the  other. 
2.  Law  itself  required  of  the  priests  more  arduous  toil 
on  Sabbath  than  on  other  days,  in  performing  temple 
services. 

8.  Hos.  6:6.  "I  desire  mercy,  not  sacrifice."  The 
design  of  the  law  was  blessing;  by  their  formality  Phari- 
seeshad  made  it  a  curse.  4.  Sabbath  designed  for  man. 
Analogous  to  3d.  Sabbath  instituted  for  man's  good, 
and  not  to  be  so  burdened  with  observances  that  his 
higher  interests  become  subordinate  to  them.  5.  Christ's 
supreme  authority;  "Son  of  man,  Lord  of  Sabbath;" 
Sabbath  law  could  be  altered  by  him  with  same  authority 
as  by  God.  Observe  supplemental  character  of  gospels: 
of  these  five  arguments,  but  two  are  common  to  all  the 
evangelists.  I^ote  increasing  self-revelation  of  Christ 
recorded  by  Syn. ;  he  is  greater  than  temple;  has  au- 
thority over  law  equal  to  God.  Thus  Syn.  and  John 
differ,  not  as  to  Christ's  personal  consciousness  of  Mes- 
siahship,  but  merely  as  to  his  mode  of  manifesting  it. 

§38.  Mt.  12  :  9-14 ;  Mk.  3:1-6;  Lk.  6  :  6-11.  Healbig 
withered  hand  on  Sabbath.  Occurred  after  Christ's  return 
to  Galilee.     Mk.  uses  definite  article,  "  the  synagogue," 


92 

probably  the  one  in  Cap.  Wieseler's  chronological 
scheme  giving  hini  too  man\'  Sabbaths,  for  this  month, 
he  makes  this  Sabbath  and  the  preceding,  consecutive 
days,  one  the  weekly  Sab.  the  other  a  feast  Sab.  Phari- 
sees watch-  Christ  to  find  pretext  for  persecuting  him. 
Christ  asks  them  "  Is  it  lawful  to  do  good  on  the  Sab- 
bath-days or  to  do  evil?  to  save  life  or  to  kill?"  Some 
say  this  question  is  unfair;  the  Pharisees  never  held  it 
was  right  to  do  wrong.  Ans.  Christ  takes  extreme  case. 
Their  forbidding  attendance  on  sick  on  Sabbath  day,  in- 
volved serious  responsibility,  possibly  loss  of  life.  Not 
to  do  good  was  to  do  evil.  Christ  had  also  in  view  their 
purpose  to  kill  him,  hence  uses  this  ad  homiiiem.  argu- 
ment :  He  intended  to  relieve  suffering,  they  were  con- 
spiring to  murder  him  ;  which  kept  Sabbath  better?  He 
also  argues  from  tlieir  practice.  They  would  never  hesi- 
tate to  pull  a  sheep  out  of  a  pit  on  Sabbath,  yet  forbade 
healing  a  crippled  man.  Talmud  now  forbids  such  help 
to  animals,  but  the  injunction  was  pei-haps  occasioned 
b}'-  Christ's  argument,  as  there  was  nothing  of  the  kind 
in  force  then.  Effect  of  this  miracle  was  not  as  formerly,  j^ 
to  excite'  admiration  of  all,  l)ut  filled  Pliarisees  with  rage 
and  led  them  to  counsel  witli  Herodians  against  Christ. 

Herodians.  1.  Westcott's  view.  (Smitli'sDict.  p.  1054.) 
Those  who  saw  in  the  Herods  a  protection  against  direct 
heathen  rule,  and  those  who  looked  with  satisfaction 
upon  such  a  compromise  between  the  ancient  faith  and 
heathen  civilization  as  Herod  the  Great  and  his  succes- 
sors aimed  at,  as  the  true  and  highest  consummation  of 
Jewish  hopes.  2.  Common  view.  Herods  mere  tools 
of  Roman  gov't,  and  the  Herodians  mere  sycophants, 
favoring  Roman  rule.  Their  union  with  Pharisees, 
politically  their  opponents,  is  a  great  step  in  the  opposi- 
tion organizing  against  Christ. 

§39.  Mt.  12  :  15-21  ;  Mk.  3  :  7-12.  Success.  Christ's 
popularity,  despite  increasing  opposition  grew  so  greatly, 
that  multitudes  follow  him  from  all  parts  of  the  country, 
Gal.,  Judea,  Idumea,  beyond  Jordan,  Tyre  and  Sidon. 
So  great  are  the  crowds,  he  is  forced  to  enter  a  boat 
"  lest  they  should  throng  him."  Multitudes  typify  final 
success  of  the  gospel  and  were  fulfillment  of  Is.  11  :  10; 
42  :  1,  which  predict  the  Gentiles  as  sharers  in  Messianic 
blessina:s. 


'(qj:^^uJ^^ 


93 

The  first  stage  of  development  of  opposition  is  now 
ended,  and  the  snhject  of  teaching  becomes  prominent. 
The  people  having  been  aroused  and  drawn  to  him.  they 
are  prepared  to  hear  his  words. 

§40.  Organization.  Mt.  10  :  2-4  ;  Mk.  8  :  13-19  ; 
Lk.  6  :  12-19.  Appointment  of  the  Tirelre.  This  is  third 
step  in  organization,  first  at' Jordan,  second  at  Sea  of 
Galilee.  Mk.  and  Lk.  clearly  connect  this  with  Sermon 
on  Mount;  Mt,  however  joins  it  with  their  temporary 
mission.  Lk.  6:  13.  Note,  difterent  classes  of  follow- 
ers distinguished,  disciples  in  general  and  apostles  chosen 
from  these.  Nature  of  office.  1.  To  be  with  him  as 
witnesses.  2.  To  preach.  3.  To  work  miracles.  Mk. 
3  :  14,  15.  These  qualifications  preclude  the  permanency 
of  this  ofiice.  In  gospels  nwme.^apostle  occurs  but  nine 
times,  Mt.,  Mk.  and  John  once  each,  Lk.  six  times,  in 
Acts  more  than  thirty  times.  They  were  "  learners  " 
until  Pentecost,  after  that  fully  apostles.  Their  miracu- 
lous power  was  not  coequal  with  that  of  Christ  btit  was 
limited  to  healinj,-  sick,  raising  de;id,  demoniacal  [)Osses- 
sion.  They  had  no  power  over  nature,  only  over  man, 
their  cures  being  illustrations  of  their  saving  work. 
Number  twelve,  significant  of  perfection  (Lange  on  Mt. 
in  loco.)  Oomp.  12  sons  of  Jacob,  stones  of -Jordan,  High 
Priest's  breast-plate,  12  spies,  12  foundations  of  New 
Jerus.,  144,000,  perfection  perfected,  the  church  in  heaven 
(Rev.)  There  are  four  lists  of  apostles;  three  in  gospels, 
one  in  Acts  1  :  13.  Each  contains  three  classes  of  four 
each.  Peter  heads  the  list.  Each  class  invariably  begins 
witli  the  same  name.  Iscariot  is  always  last.  Lebbeus 
(Mt.,)  Thaddeus  (Mk.,)  and  Judas  the  brother  of  Jas. 
(Lk.,)  are  commonly  considered  as  referring  to  same  per- 
son.    (Farrar  Vol.  L,  p.  251.) 

§41.  Teaching.  Mt.  5  :  1  to  8  :  1 ;  Lk.  6  :  20—49. 
Sermon  on  31oimt.  Contrast  in  point  of  simplicity,  pro- 
fundity, grasp  of  principles,  and  authority,  between 
Christ's  teaching  and  that  of  heathen  philosophers  or 
Jewish  schools,  afl:brd8  clear  proof  of  his  divinity.  Four 
forms  of  Christ's  teaching.  1.  Long  discourses  in  John 
relating  to  his  person.  2.  Long  discourses  in  Syn. 
concerning  kingdom  of  heaven,  involving  his  person  and 
sacrifice.  Longest  are.  Sermon  on  Mt.,  and  denuncia- 
tions  of  woe    against    Pharisees.     3.  Parables,    setting 


94 


fortli  the  nature  of  kingdom  of  heaven,  the  duties  and 
relations  of  its  individual  members.  4.  Short  sayings, 
pithy  statements  often  repeated.  Self  testimony  of  Christ 
in  John,  is  contained  in  long  di3courses;  in  Syn.it  con- 
sists in  the  titles  he  assumes  (e.  g.  Son  of  David,  Son  of 
Man,  Son  of  God,)  ;ind  claims  which  he  makes,  (e.g.  to 
forgive  sins,  to  raise  dead,  to  judge,  &c.) 

/I.  Son  of  God.  Expressions  most  frequent  in  John. 
Theories,  a.  Lowest,  Pantheistic.  Strauss  and  Baur. 
Great  truth  of  Christ's  teaching  was  universal  fatherhood 
of  God,  as  contrasted  with  the  vindictive  Jehovah  of  0. 
T  Christ's  conviction  of  God's  love  to  man  and  man's 
dependence  upon  God,  raised  liim  to  his  high  plane  of 
thought,  but  being  unacquainted  with  Pantheistic  phi- 
losophy, he  erred  in  conceiving  of  God  as  a  personal 
.being.  As  most  vividly  apprehending  the  fatherhood  of 
God,  he  is  styled  son  of  God.  b.  Ewald.  By  this  title 
Christ  claimed  nothing  divine.  Only  higher,  purer, 
religious  union  with  God.  To  him  was  given  a  perfect 
divine  communication,  making  him  conscious  (1)  that 
there  was  to  be  a  perfected  rule  of  God  upon  the  earth, 
(2)  that  he  was  to  introduce  it  as  its  king.  c.  Orthodox 
I     view.     Christ,  Son  of  God,  by  eternal  generatimi.  ^ 

X  2.  Son  of  Man.  Expression  occurs  T^times  in  gospels, 
and  but  4  times  out  of  them.  Christ's  chosen  term  for 
himself.  It  is  applied  to  him  by  others  but  twice.  Theo- 
ries, a.  At  iirst,  expressive  merely  of  essential  human- 
ity and  humiliation,  of  the  fact  that  Christ's  sympathies 
unite  him  as  a  brother  to  all  men. 

Change  occurs  toward  close  of  his  ministry  and  the 
title  is  used  as  containing  Messianic  force.  Comp.  Mt. 
24:  30;  26  :  64  with  Dan."?:  13,  14,  a  Messianic  predic- 
tion. />.  Title  denoted  Christ  was  ideal  man,  nothing 
superhuman.  Gess.  remarks,  this  view  irreconcilable 
with  Christ's  constant  claims  of  divine  attributes,  c. 
Orthodox.  "The  Son  of  Mail^,"  above  other  men,  dis- 
tinguished by  some  peculiarity,  which  may  be  discovered 
by  considering  what  is  predicted  of  him,  viz,,  divine 
honors,  prerogatives,  etc. 

Why  does  Christ  employ  this  title  ?  1.   Ans  :  Incognito 

to  hide  his  real  divine  nature  till  men  should  be  prepared 

to  accept  him.     So  Ewald,  Bleek.     2.  A   mere  circundo- 

,  '    cution  for  Jesus,  witlj  which  it  is  interchanged.     3.  Used 


^p^  ..Jd!  ^^'^M.  9^^ /J  W^  oL^e.*?^ 


a<!K;x^<r-f-^t«^-^%5^;2^  ^^  V^AjCK.^.^    JL^(>-^Ju   vUH>^r  '^fez 


Oi    ^MM.AAjaJ'^ 


e<..-^ 


s-^o-^^^^'X/uai 


AOt^ 


■^    .^6^v":^/^A-t^i^    /M-'^U.  ^^C^-^^^^^ 


1m 


{Icc^r^^  .  rj!^  .-.^v-ttvi/^y 


-""'ct-t-'^'^-^f 


4-L^^^iAjM' 


95 

to  set  forth  Christ's  Messiahship.  The  title  "  Messiah  " 
could  not  be  employed  because  of  the  false  ideas  of  the 
peo[)le  respecting  it.  Had  he  assumed  this  title  men 
would  have  expected  him  to  fulfill  their  wrong  concep- 
tions. Jesus  would  not  be  called  Christ  until  late  in  his 
life.  Only  once  did  he  call  himself  "  the  Christ;"  and 
that  was  at  his  trial  and  led  to  his  condemnation.  The 
title  evidently  contains  the  two  ideas  of  exaltation  and 
humiliation.  After  the  Resurrection  it  was  not  used  by 
the  disciples.  It  is  evidently  based  on  Ps.  8,  and  Dan. 
7  :  13,  14.  Cess,  sees  a  reference  to  the  Protevangelium, 
Gen.  3:  15. 

The  expressions  "  kingdom  of  heaven,"  •'  kingdom  of 
God,"  should  also  be  noticed..  "Kingdom  of  God"  is 
employed  by  Mk..  Lk.  and  John.  Matt,  used  the  phrase 
but  twice.  His  expression  is  Kingdom  of  Heaven  {zcov 
o'j/jauiov,  plur.,  Heb.  form,  alluding  to  different  spheres.) 
Some  regard  the  two  expressions  as  identical.  Heaven 
is  put  for  God  as  being  the  place  of  his  dwelling.  This, 
iiowevei',  does  not  explain  Matt.'s  exclusive  use  of  one. 
Others,  therefore,  say  the  phrase  "  kingdom  of  heaven" 
is  used  by  Matt,  to  contrast  the  new  stage  of  God's  rule 
with  that  of  O.  T.  theocracy,  i.  e.  gospel  is  heavenly  ful- 
lillment  of  God's  rule  on  earth.  "Kingdom  of  God"  is 
equally  applicable  to  both  dispensations.  The  same 
essential  idea  is,  however,  involved  in  b')th.  Diff.  views 
iield  as  to  what  Christ  intended  to  do  in  establishing  "  the 
kingdom":  1.  Infidel.  Christ  attempted  to  establish 
an  earthly  kingdom,  to  free  the  Jews,  but  perished  in  the 
attempt.  2.  Rationalistic,  a,  He  aimed  at  political  re- 
generation. Seeing  that  social  reform  was  necessary  to 
this,  he  became  a  moralist,  b,  Christ  at  first  held  the 
same  view  as  Pharisees.  Gradually  his  mistaken  ideas 
w^ere  corrected,  and  he  sought  to  carry  on  a  spiritual 
work.  Renan  r^Christ  vacillates  between  these  two  views 
of  his  work,  the  Pharisaic  and  Spiritual.  3.  Accoinmo- 
datioii-Schleiermacher,  Schenkel  :  The  aim  which  Christ 
had  in  his  mind  was  simply  to  found  as  a  teacher  a  moral, 
spiritual  system.  He  however  accommodated  himself  in 
his  instructions  to  the  popular  misconceptions  of  the 
people  with  regard  to  the  theocracy.  Either  he,  like  the 
people,  was  blinded  by  misunderstanding,  or  he  made 
use  of  their  false  notions  to  elevate  them. 


96 

Sermon,  on.  the  Mount.  Christ  now  gives  a  fuller  and 
more  orderly  arranged  specimen  of  his  teaching  than  he 
had  previousl}'  afforded  the  people.  Tiie  time  has  now- 
come  for  a  more  complete  revelation,  that  friends  and 
foes  may  be  separated  and  the  gospel  sj'stem  somewhat 
consolidated.  Place.  According  to  tradition  the  Mt,  of 
Beatitudes,  a  lime-stone  ridge  7  or  8  m.  S,  W.  of  Cap'm, 
called  Kurn  Hattin  on  account  of  its  two  peaks.  To  this 
identification  Robinson  objects  that  the  Mt.  is  too  far 
distant  from  Cap'm  to  be  consistent  with  Matt.  8  :  5  and 
Lk.  7  :  1.  The  tradition,  also,  is  only  in  the  Latin  church 
and  from  tlie  13th  century.  Matt,  and  Lk.  difter.  As 
to  j^lacc,  Mt.  says,  "  w^ent  up  into  a  mountain  and  sat;'' 
Lk.,  "  came  down  and  stood  in  the  plain."  Mt.  however 
uses  TO  6(10^  in  a  wide  sense — a  mountain  district.  Christ 
"  went  up  to  pray,"  (Lk.  6  :  12)  and  came  down,  i.  e  part 
way,  to  the  level  plain  between  the  two  peaks,  and 
taught.  As  to  time^  Mt.  places  it  at  commencement  of 
Gal.  ministry  ;  Lk.  puts  it  some  months  later  in  connec- 
tion with  the  call  of  tlie  Twelve.  The  miracle  following 
in  Mt.  is  healing  of  leper  ;  in  Lk.,  healing  of  centurion's 
servant.  In  length,  \it.  gives  107  verses;  Lk.  but  30. 
The  accounts  resemble  one  another  in  the  facts  that  both 
are  mountain  sermons  occurring  early  in  Gal.  ministry; 
that  the  beginning  and  close  are  alike  in  both,  and  the 
drift  of  thought  is  the  same.  Theories  of  the  relation  be- 
tween the  two.  1.  Two  accounts  of  the  same  sermon, 
blurred  and  distorted  by  tradition.  Some  follow  Mt.  as 
most  complete,  others  Luke  as  presenting  fewest  difficul- 
ties. 2.  Conscious  selection  lies  at  base  of  differences ; 
one  discourse  purposely  varied  by  Evangelists  ;  Lk.  omits 
what  was  special  to  Jews.  This  coincides  with  differen- 
ces, but  does  not  offer  an  adequate  explanation.  3.  Com- 
mon. One  discourse ;  Lk.'s  acc(mnt  historical  as  Christ 
gave  it;  Mt.'s  an  amplification  by  additions  grouped  from 
other  discourses,  analogous  to  Mt.'s  plan  in  parables.  A 
specimen  of  Christ's  teaching.  Objection  to  this  is  the 
unity  of  Mt.'s  account.  Calvin  and  Neander  hold  that 
both  Mt.  and  Lk.  give  specimens  of  Christ's  teaching. 
4.  Two  discourses  on  same  occasion,  the  one  esoteric 
(Mt.'s)  to  the  disci[)les,  tlie  other  exoteric  (Lk.'s)  to  the 
multitude.  (So  Augustine,  Lange).  Objections:  There 
is  nothing  esoteric  in  Mt.     Christ  makes  no  distinction  of 


2e^-^-<v^   .,^^.2^^  -^    ^   ^.,«^.^^.,.,...^^.^^  ^:^/    .^-^^^  ^^:^,^ 


97 


this  kind  in  his  teaching.  5.  Two  distinct,  yet  similar 
discourses.  Christ  repeats  the  same  truths  because  the 
circumstances  and  the  want:^  of  the  people  were  the  same. 
(So  Dr.  Alexander.)  The  choice  lies  between  the  third 
and  tifth  view.  At  all  events,  Christ  gave  a  discourse  at 
the  time  of  calling  the  Twelve. 

Design  of  the  Sermon,  and  Connection  loith  the  History. 
The  design  of  the  discourse  was  to  show  the  nature  of  the 
Messiah's  kingdom.  Christ  came  preaching  a  kingdom 
and  repentance.  ■jSTaturally  it  would  be  aisked,  what  is 
this  repentance,  what  this  kingdom,  what  its  relations  to 
Pharif>aic  ideas  and  to  O.  T.  economy  ?  There  was  need 
of  explanation,  that  the  people  might  know  to  what  they 
were  committing  themselves.  Christ  in  this  discourse 
gives  it,  removing  all  erroneous  views  and  false  interpre- 
tations of  his  work.  Some  have  mistakenly  thought  that 
Christ  here  sets  forth  a  system  of  theology,  others,  a  sys- 
tem of  Ethics.  The  sermon  was  related  to  Pharisaic 
errors  in.teaching  in  opposition  to  them, that  membership 
in  God's  kingdom  was  dependent  not  upon  external  cir- 
cumstances but  upon  personal  character;  that  the  Law 
was  to  be  observed  not  in  a  formal  manner  but  in  its 
spirit.  Tliree  main  divisions  :  1.  Ch.  5  :  1-16,  character  ot- 
members;  characteristics  required,  spiritual.  2.  Ch.  5  .^' 
17-2t>.  Claims  of  kingdom,  a,  5  :  17-48,  moral  requisi: 
tions  :  b,  ch.  6,  religious  requisites.  3.  Ch.  7,  exhorta* 
tions  to  true  life;  temptations  and  dangers,  how  avoided. 
The  effect  was  astonishment  (Mt.  7:  29)  "  for  he  taught 
them  as  one  having  authority."  Sceptics  view  this  dis- 
course as  genuine,  making  an  exception  in  its  favor. 
They  regard  Christ  as  teaching  an  ethical  and  religious 
system.  They  draw  a  contrast  between  its  free  tone  and 
the  later  dogma  of  Paul  and  other  Apostles.  Hence 
Christian  dogma  was  a  late  invention.  Christ  taught 
morals,  not  doctrine.  Such  is  true  Christianity,  love  to 
God  as  our  Father,  to  our  brother-man  as  to  ourself. 
Ans :  1.  Discourse  was  not  intended  to  be  a  full  system, 
but  adapted  to  the  comprehension  of  the  people.  2. 
Adapted  to  its  position  in  historj'  of  redemption.  Reve- 
lation corresponds  to  the  period  in  which  it  is  given.  3. 
Completed  Christian  doctrine  is  based,  on  life,  death  and 
resurrection  of  Christ,  hence  could  not  be  brought  for- 
ward at  this  stage.    4.  Unity  of  truth  is  always  preserved, 


98 

althougli  it  is  more  definitely  stated  from  time  to  time. 
O.  T,  and  Christ's  teaching  involved  all  fundamental  doc- 
trines. In  the  Epistles,  however,  the^^  assume  a  more 
analytic  form. 

That  the  discourse  is  Eoauf/elical  not  Ethical,  as  Skep- 
tics assert,  is  seen  :  1.  Because  its  standard  of  spiritual- 
ity is  so  high  that  supernatural  aid  is  required.  Need  of 
forgiveness  is  shown.  Christ  must  be  sought  and  this 
search  is  to  be  by  means. 

2.  Righteousness  is  distinguished  from  moral  right 
because  it  is  connected  with  Christ's  kingdom.  His  per- 
son is  involved  in  his  work.  His  disciples  are  spoken 
of  as  those  having  purity. 

The  discourse  was  an  evangelical  restatement  of  Law 
of  Moses,  and  a  preparation  for  the  gospel. 

§42.  Miracles.  Mt.  8  :  5-13  ;  Lk.  7  :  1-10.  Healinc/ 
Centurion's  servant.  Capernaum.  §42, 43,  resume  the  sub- 
ject of  miracles.  All  centurions  mentioned  in  N.  T.  ap- 
pear in  n  favorable  light.  Mt.  8  :  5,  he  loved  Jewish  na- 
tion and  built  a  synagogue.  Though  a  heathen  Christ 
declared  of  him,  '•  1  have  not  found  so  great  faith,  no  not 
in  Israel."  Comp.  centurion  at  cruciti.xion  (Mk.  15  :  39; 
Lk.  23  :  47),  Cornelius  (Act.  10  :  1),  Julius  (Acts  27  :  1), 
(Smith's  Diet.  p.  406.)  Legion  contained  about  6000  in- 
fantry, with  a  varying  proportion  of  cavalry.  It  "was 
subdivided  into  ten  cohorts  ("band,"  Acts  10:  1),  the 
cohort  into  three  maniples,  and  the  maniple  into  two 
centuries,  containing  originally  100  men,  as  the  name 
implies,  but  subsequently  from  50  to  100  men,  according 
to  the  strength  of  the  legion."  (Smith's  Diet.  Army,  p. 
162.)  Gal.  "was  garrisoned  with  Roman  soldiery;  Her- 
od's bodyguards,  and  those  farming  imperial  revenues. 

New  features  in  this  miracle.  1.  Intercessory  faith. 
Master  prays  for  his  servant.  2.  Striking  greatness  of 
faith.  '  As  his  servants  obeyed  his  word,  so  disease 
would  ol)ey  the  ivord  of  Christ.'  3.  It  was  a  Gentile's 
faith.  This  is  first  recorded  instance  of  individual  heal- 
ing, outside  the  ciiosen  people,  hence  intercession  of 
Jewish  elders  is  sought.  (Lk.  7:  3.)  Christ  praises  this 
Gentile'p  faith,  as  greater  than  any  in  Israel,  and  applies 
this  fact  by  declaring  '  Many  Gentiles  shall  be  called, 
many  children  of  the  kingdom  cast  ofiT'  (Mt.  8  :  11-12.) 
Objections.     1.  Mt.  says   centurion   came    in    person    to 


hlSL^^   OU^    ''    ^MLy-^<^-'^  yl^^CL^^lM-^     ^  L^>t^'^  iM^rri^ 


Ud-'2^C^--^<^C^      (^    ^ 


99 

Christ:  Lk.  he  sent  tlirough  the  elders,  then  tliron^h 
friends,  but  had  no  personatinterview,  Ans.  "  Qui  facit 
per  alium,  facit  per  se."  "  What  one  does  by  his  agent, 
he  does  himself"  Mt.  dwells  on  mere  fact  of  miVacle 
as  displaying  great  faith;  Lk.  goes  into  detail.  (Robin. 
Gk.  Harm.  p.  198.)  2.  Christ  lacks  either  sincerity 
or  foreknowledge.  He  starts  for  house,  but  does  no"t 
go  to  it  ;  either  did  not  intend  going  and  practiced 
deception,  or  changed  his  mind,  because  ignorant  of  what 
he  was  about  to  do.  Ans.  This  assumes  Christ  was 
bound  to  disclose  all  of  his  intentions.  No  inconsistency 
in  Christ's  not  knowing  things  about  to  happen.  To 
his  human  consciousness  things  came  as  to  ours, 

§43.  Lk.  7:  11-17.  Raising  son  of  loidow  of  Nain.  Lk. 
8  :  l-o,  narrates  a  second  general  circuit  of  Gal.  Some 
hold  this  refers  to  prospective  journey,  undertaken  near 
close  of  ministry.  Common  view  (Andrews,  Wieseler,) 
the  reference  in  Lk.  is  retrospective,  summing  up 
the  events  narrated  in  §§43 — 47.  Exegesis  favors  this 
interpretation.  "Nain,  the  modern  Nein  is  situated  on 
the  northwestern  edge  of  the  '  Little  Hermon,'  where  the 
ground  falls  into  the  plain  of  Esdraelon."  The  entrance 
must  always  have  been  up  the  steep  ascent  from  the 
plain  and  here,  on  the  west  side  of  the  village,  the  rock 
is  full  of  sepulchral  caves.  (Smith's  Diet.  p.  2058.)  Christ 
appi'oaches  N^ain  attended  b^^  many  disciples,  and  much 
people.  "^Style  of  gospel  description  simple,  beautiful, 
impressive,  "  only  son  of  his  mother,  and  she  was  awidow.'^ 
This  was  onl}^  time  Christ  was  ever  in  plain  of  Esdraelon. 

This  class  of  miracles  manifest  Christ's  power  over 
departed  spirits  and  attest  his  claim  to  be  source  of  life, 
physical  and  s[iiritual.  Three  cases  of  this  kind  are 
recorded,  each  exhibiting  more  striking  power  than  the 
preceding,  viz.,  Jairus'  daughter,  from  death  bed; 
Widow's  son  from  the  bier;  Lazarus,  from  the  tomb. 
Chronological  order.  Widow's  son,  Jairus'  daughter, 
Laz.  Sceptical  iheories  cunceryiing  these  miracles.  1.  Nat- 
iircdisttc.  Cases  of  suspended  animation  ;  death  only  ap- 
parent ;  pretended  miracle,  only  resuscitation. 

2.  Mythical.  Mere  inventions  of  early  church  to  make 
Christ's  life  accord  with  O.  T.  prophecy  and  type. 

Effect:  all  feared,  glorified  God,  saying  "Great 
Prophet  has  arisen,"  "  God  has  visited  Israel"     Christ's 


100 


fame  spread  not  only  through  Judea,  but  through  whole 
"  reo^ion  round  aboutj^' 

§44.  Opposition.  Mt.  11:  2-19;  Lk.  7:  18-35.  Mes- 
sageof.Jolm  Bap.  In  this  section  renewal  of  opposition  is 
occasioned  by  Bap.'^s  disciples,  and  continues  to  §50.  Mt. 
places  this  narrative  after  sending  out  the  Twelve,  but 
this  is  too  late,  for  during  absence  of  Twelve,  John 
was  beheaded:  Mk.  6:  30-"  Mt.  14:  13.  Lk's  order  is 
therefore  best.  The  report  of  Christ's  miracles  was  the 
occasion  of  Bap.'s  message.  John  was  imprisoned  at 
Machaerus,  "•  on  the  borders  of  the  desert,  N.  of  Dead 
Sea,  on  frontiers  of  Arabia,"  "identified  with  the  ruins 
M'Kauer."  Fathers  say  John  did  not  doubt  himself,  but 
sent  to  Christ  that  his  disciples  might  be  satisfied.  But 
that  Bap.  was,  at  least  to  some  extent,  staggered  and  per- 
plexed by  Christ's  method  of  developing  his  work,  is 
evident  from  fact  of  Clirist's  answer  being  addressed  not 
to  disciples,  but  John  himself.  Message  expresses  im- 
patience mingled  with  distrust.  He  was  languishing  in 
prison,  multitudes  of  others  were  being  relieved  and 
blessed  by  miracles  ;  he  the  forerunner,  was  forgotten  ; 
"  was  this  really  the  Christ,  or  should  they  look  for 
another?"  (Farrar  Vol.  I.,  p.  289.)  Christ's  only  reply 
is  reference  to  his  miracles,  thus  showing  estimate  he  put 
upon  them  :  His  works  were  equivalent  to  assertion  of 
divinity.  John  Bap.  was  greatest  prophet  because  ot'his 
p.isition  as  "  index  finger  of  0.  T." 

Christ  received  bv  the  people,  but  Pharisees  and  law- 
yers doubted  (Lk.  7.^  29.)  ' 

§45.  Mt.  11  :  20-30.  Upbraids  the.  cities.  Discii)1es  of 
John  having  returned  to  him,  Christ  gives  his  estimate 
of  the  reception  he  had  met  in  Gal.  The  same  or  a  simi- 
lar denunciation  of  woes  is  recorded  in  Lk.  10:  13,  in 
connection  with  sending  out  seventy.  Exact  location  of 
these  cities  is  unknown  ;  |)robably  W.  shore  Sea  of  Gal. 
Their  rejection  of  Christ  contrasted  with  ancient  heathen 
opposition  to  theocracy,  viz.,  Tyre  and  Sidon,  Sodom  and 
Gomorrah.  There  is  no  record  of  a  single  miracle, 
wrought  in  Bethsaida  or  Chorazin,  yet  the  Evangelist 
says  these  were  the  cities  "  wherein  ???os/ of  his  mighty 
works  were  done."  0 — ^ 

§46.  Lk.  7  :  36-50.     Anointiiuj  bji  a  inoman.     This  took 
place  at  either  Cap.,  Nain,  Magdala.     It  differ3  from  the 


v7  'kZy  ^(AU>/iJljL^<°M    4Lf^    /-t>'L>=«»-»-<i 


'.'Iks-^   (xy'J^  x^vvJr 


101 

case  recorded  by  Mt.,  Mk.,  Jolin,as  this  is  early  in  hia 
ministry;  that  in  last  week  of  his  life.  Romish  tradition 
considers  tliis  woman  the  Mary  Maijdaloie,  mentioned 
a  few  verses  hiter  (Lk.  8  :  2)  and  makes  her  the  repre- 
sentative of  penitent  frailty.  This  idea  is  based  wholly 
on  mere  juxtaposition,  there  being  nothing  definite  to 
show  that  these  arc  necessarily'  the  same  person,  or  that 
the  seven  devils  were  demons  of  impurity.  Tiiis  incident 
contrasts  with  Christ's  previous  treatment,  (§45,)  is  asso- 
ciated with  new  instance  of  opposition,  and  gives  rise  to 
Christ's  first  parable:  the  two  debtors.  (Farrar  Vol.  I., 
p.  296.  (^ \ 

§47.  Lk.  8  :  1-3.  Second  circuit  in  Gal.  General  state- 
ment, summing  up  results  of  the  journey,  begun  §43, 
giving  Christ's  mode  of  living  and  travelling,  and  hi.s 
household,  viz.  the  Twelve,  and  certain  women,  Mary  of 
Magdala  (W.  ot  Cap.,)  Joanna  of  Herod's  household  etc. 
Connection  :  Love  and  devotion  of  these  attendants  con- 
trasted with  rejection  and  opposition  of  Pharisees  and 
masses.      Christ  was  supported  bv  free-will  ott'erings. 

§48.  Mk.  3:  19-30:  Mt.  12:  22-37;  Lk.  11:  14,  15, 
17-23.  HeaUiui  blind  and  dumb  demoniac.  Events  of  §§48- 
56  occur  during  a  single  day,  the  great  day  of  parables, 
which  opens  with  cure  of  demoniac.  Lk.  records  this 
cure  in  ch.  11,  during  period  of  last  journeys  .to  Jerus. 
Two  methods  of  harmonizing  with  Mt.  1.  Cases  are  the 
same.  Then  must  follow  .Vlt.'s  order  because  he  gives 
distinct  note  of  time,  ch.  13:  1,  "that  same  daij.''  2. 
Cases  are  analogous.  (Andrews  p.  365.)  Historical  re- 
sult is  unchanged  by  either  method.  Collision  with 
Pharisees  did  occur  at  this  time,  and  only  question  is, 
was  it  repeated?  Xole  intense  excitement  that  was  pre- 
vailing. Mk.  3:  21,  Christ's  friends  think  him  insane, 
endeavor  to  put  him  under  restraint ;  ordinary  meals  in-  ^^^J  p^j 
terrupted,  multitudes  corning  together  "so  they  could  T  , 

not  so  much  as  eat  bread."  (Mk.  3:  20,)  Christ  goes  to  vW^^v- 
sea-side,  is  compelled  to  enter  a  boat  to  address  them; 
crowds  ascribe  to  him  Messianic  titles.  "  Is  not  this  the 
^  Son  of  David  ?"  Pharisees  alarmed,  unable  to  gainsay 
the  miracles,  impute  them  to  agency  of  Satan.  Mk.  3: 
22,  "  the  scribes  whibh  came  down  from  Jems.''''  shows 
Christ  was  being  watched  by  Jewish  authorities,  and  the 
present    opposition     was    official.  'Beelzebub,  name  of 


102 

Philistine  deity,  ineaiiiiiii;  "  Fly  god,"  Pharisees  change 
to  Beelzebonl,  i.  e.,  "Dung  god."  Christ's  I'epI}-.  1. 
Ad  liominum  argument,  "  If  I  hy  Beelzebonl  east  out 
devils,  by  whom  do  you  ?"  Reference  to  incantations 
and  exorcisms  of  Rabbinical  Schools.  2.  Parable  of 
strong  man  armed.  If  Clirist  by  Satan  was  casting  out 
devils,  he  must  first  have  conquered  Satan.  3.  Warns 
tliem  against  the  unpardonable  sin.  4.  Denounces  tiiem 
as  generation  of  vipers,  seed  of  serpent,  i.  e.  children  of 
Satan  in  their  nature,  opinions,  actions. 

§49.  Mt.  12  :  38-45  ;  Lk.  11  :  16,  24-36.  Pharisees 
seek  a  sign.  In  face  of  all  Christ's  miracles  they  demand 
some  evidence  ot  Messiahship  that  will  accord  witli  their 
perverted  Messianic  notions.  Mt.'s  order  is  preferred  to 
Lk.'s,  because  Ch.  12:  46  chronological  sequence  is  given, 
"  while  he  yet  talked."  Clirist  refused  sign.  He  had 
already  furnished  ample  miraculous  proof  of  Messianic 
claims. 

Parable  of  seven  spirits,  refers  to  present  condition 
of  people.  Apparently  changed  in  feeling  toward  Christ, 
the}'  would  shortly  become  more  hostile  toward  him,  than 
ever  before.  Shows  that  Christ  was  not  misled  by  their 
seeming  and  probably  sincere  faith. 

§50.' Mt.   12:   46-50;  Mk.   3:   31-35;  Lk.  8  :  19-21. 

3Iother  and  brethren  desire  to  speak  with  him,  his  incre^'sing 

•  popularity  and  antagonism  to  the  Pharisees  giving  them 

concern  about  him.     He  shows  his  earthly  relations  typify 

w,  his  spiritual  relations  to  every  true   believer.     Great  acl- 

"nj  vance  in  Pharisaic  opposition  ;  charge  of  blasphemy  has 

j,'^  been  made  and  retorted. 

■"  §§54,   55.  Teaching.   Mt.    13.     Mk.  4.     Lk.  8  :  4-16. 

Great  day  of  Parables.  Syn.  here  mark  decided  change 
and  advance  in  Christ's  teaching.  It  was  nece-*sary 
Christ  should  still  instruct  the  jteople,  but  in  order  to 
blind  opposition,  truth  must  be  clothed  in  |»arabolic  fo-m, 
that  his  enemies  may  not  employ  his  words  against  him. 

Four  general  suiyects  twice  repeated  characterize  the 
ministry  in  E.  Gal.  up  to  this  point: 

1.  Organization,  §29  and  §40;  2.  Miracles,  §§30-33 
and  §§42-43;  3.  Opposition,  §§34-39  and  §§44-50;  4. 
Teaching  §41  and  §§54-55. 

Christ  employs  parables.  1.  Symbolic  metiiod  awakens 
imagination,    excites    interest,     exercises     memory     and 


T^f/i^j  'trJ^oJ   . 


103 

jndgnient.  2.  "Tt)  him  tliiit  hath  sliall  be  o^iveii."  The 
recipients  of  God's  grace,  will  be  able  to  recognize  his 
truth  even  when  clotlied  in  symbolic  form.  What  is 
grace  to  believer,  becomes  jmlicial  condemnation  to  un- 
believer.    Is.  6  :  9  is  thus  fnltilled.     (See  Mt.  13  :  11-15.) 

Definition  of  Parable — an  illustration  of  moral  or  reli- 
gions truth  derived  from  analogy  of  common  experience. 
It  differs  from  the  Fable  in  that  "in  the  latter,  qualities 
or  acts  of  a  higher  class  of  beings  may  be  attributed  to 
a  lower  (e.  g.  those  of  men  to  brutes  )  ;  while  in  the  for- 
mer, the  lower  sphere  is  kept  perfectly  distinct  from  that 
which  it  seems  to  ilhistrai"e."  Neander  :  It  differs  from 
the  Myth  "  in  being  the  result  of  conscious  deliberate 
thought,  not  the  growth  of  unconscious  realism,  pei'soni- 
fying  attributes,  appearing,  no  one  knows  how,  in  popu- 
lar belief"  It  differs  from  the  Proverb  in  tiiat  "it  must 
include  a  similitude  of  some  kind,  while  the  Proverb 
ma}'  assert  without  a  similitude,  some  wide  generaliza- 
tion of  experience."  It  differs  fpom  the  Allegory,  in 
that  the  latter  really  involves  no  comparison.  Parable 
may  be  wholly  fictitious  or  partly  based  on  real  events. 

Three  great  grojvps,  distinctly  marked  in  gospels:  1. 
seven  in  Mt.  18,  illustrate  nature  of  kingdom  of  Heaven. 
2.  Lk.  Chs.  12-18,  set  fortli  immediate,  personal  relations 
of  the  individual  believer  tt)  God.  3.  Mt.  25,  those 
pointing  to  Judgment  and  consummation  of  the  king- 
dom. These  groups  are  supplemental  in  their  relation 
to  one  anotlier.  First  group  contains  five  fundamental 
truths.  1.  Sower  and  seed.  Varied  reception  of  gospel 
truth,  by  different  classes  of  hearers.  2.  Tares  and 
wheat.  Evil  springs  up  among  the  good.  3.  Mustardnjoi^c 
seed,  Leaven.  Growth  of  church  externally,  internally. 
4.  Hid  treasure,  Pearl  of  great  price.  Value  of  kingdom, 
necessity  of  sacrifice.  5.  Net.  Gathering  of  all  kinds; 
mixed  condition  of  visible  church  until  end  of  world. 
Skeptics  reject  Tares,  and  Net,  because  thoy  imply  con- 
scious divinity  of  Christ,  and  contain  the  late  ideas  of 
imperfection  in  the  church.  They  assert  Mk.'s  parable 
of  seed  growing  secretly,  is  derived  from  that  of  the 
Sower.  Bengel  says  these  Parables  form  outline  of 
Church  History.  Lange  carrries  this  idea  to  extreme, 
viz.  Sower,  Apostolic  Age;  Tares,  Ancient  Cath. Church; 
Mustard  seed,  State  church  under  Constantine;  Leaven, 


104 


Medieval  Church  ;  liid  Treasure,  Reformation  ;  Pearl, 
Christianity  vs.  world;  Net,  Final  Judgment.  A  nat- 
ural transition  is  observable  running  through  all  seven. 
They  illustrate  self  conscious  divinity  of  Christ:  field  is 
the  worle,  lie  sends  his  angels,  he  separates.  He  might 
naturally  in  Parable  have  ref(n-red  to  God,  but  avoids 
doing  so.  Christ's  exposition  of  Sower  and  Tares  is 
model  of  interpretation.  Spiritual  lesson  should  not  be 
sought  in  every  particular,  some  details  serving  merely 
to  keep  up  connection.  Fathers  attempted  to  spiritualize 
all  the  minutiae.  Mt.  18  :  36,  Christ's  going  into  the 
house  makes  apparent  division  in  his  discourse,  parables 
spoken  before  being  addressed  to  people  in  general, 
those  afterward  to  his  disciples  only.  Common  opinion 
is  that  these  parables  were  all  delivered  upon  one  da^'. 
Though  tliis  hypothesis  is  not  necessar}',  there  is  certainly 
marked  unity  in  these  teachings.  <T^ 

Note.  §§48-56— one  day:''  §57  one  day:  §§58-60 
one  day.  These  three  days  though  possibly  not  succes- 
sive, are  not  widely  separated. 

§56.  Miracles.  Mt.  8:18-27;  Mk..  4:  35-41;  Lk. 
8  :  22-25  ;  9  :  57-62.  Crossed  the  Lake  on  evening  of 
same  day,  to  escape  crowds  and  avoid  Pharisees.  Cer- 
tain man  desires  to  follow  Christ.  He  replies  "Foxes 
have  holes."  Christ's  poverty  should  not  be  exagger- 
ated ;  it  was  voluntary,  not  forced.  V.  60.  Christ's  ser- 
vice supersedes  everything  cor.flicting  with  it.  New 
class  of  Miracles  introduced,  those  over  nature,  teaching 
Christ's  care  and  deliverance  of  his  followers  from  dan- 
ger. E.  side  urge  Christ  to  depart,  on  W.  beg  him  to 
remain. 

§57.  Mt.  8  :  28-34;  Mk.  5:  1-21;  Lk.  8:  26-40.  Be- 
moniacs  at  Gadara.  Text  differs  as  to  name  of  place. 
This  case,  palpable  jtroof  of  individuality  of  devils. 
First  recorded  visit  to  E.  of  Lake;  preparation  A^r  fur- 
ther sojourn.  Tells  demoniacs  to  [mblish  cures,  because 
here  Christ  was  beyond  the  reach  of  Pharisees,  and  the 
report  would  prepare  for  his  subsequent  visit.  Swine 
shows  region  outside  Jewish  influence.  Their  destruction 
no  part  of  the  miracle.  Mt.  mentions  two  demoniacs, 
others  but  one.  Note  contrast,  dwellers  on  E.  of  Lake 
urge  Christ  to  depart,  on  W.  beg  him  to  remain. 

§58.  Mt.  9:  10-17;  Mk.  2:  15-22;  Lk.  5:  29-39. 
Levi's  feast.     Not  positivel}^  successive  ;  most   think   so. 


,Xi=^   ^   /  ff$. 


)1^^  JuLroaJj'  it    .1-—-      '/'  J&^    K*^l^^  L-o/uc/iib   'H>t^v^    'TTn.txV;- 


al^-^-^^^-aZy  at^-'-^^-sL-  o 


-^-O^r; 


■v^    ^OL    ^^--^  ~eM-e:^U^c<J^  ^-4^^-<.^G^y^.eJU  <rr  kLyJ^^l , 


:<;:t^  /j/  z:fc  /\aJ>m   -^j^yyQ^  oAjJLi  ^  ■C^ajA-i^^Ju^^.'x..UX^  vtl^ . 


105 

Wiet^eler,  EUicott,  Tischendorf,  synchronize  it  with  call  of 
Mt,  Mt.  gives  feast  on  account  of  Christ's  intended  de- 
parture  from  Gah  Two  new  charges  from  Pharisees, 
and  disciples  of  John  Bap.  :  a.'^Eating  with  publicans 
and  sinners.  O.  T.  regulations  insisted  upon  social  sev- 
erance ;  no  Jew  was  permitted  to  eat  with  those  ceremo- 
nially unclean,  b.  Christ  and  his  disciples  neglect  fast- 
ing. Former  charges  were,  Christ's  making  himself 
equal  to  God,  breaking  Sabbath,  casting  out  devils  by 
Beelzebub. 

§59.  Mt.  9:  18-26;  Mk.  5:  22-43;  Lk.  8:41-56. 
Jairus  comes  whilst  Christ  was  conversing  with  disciples 
of  John,  at  Levi's  feast.  On  way  to  Jairus'  house,  heals 
woman  with  bloody  issue.  Peculiarity  of  cure,  is  mode 
of  approach.  "  Virtu e*(r?'jva/^^v)  had  gone  out  of  him" 
does  not  signify  emanation  of  unconscious  power.  Christ 
voluntarily  performed  the  cure.  'Trouble  not  the  mas- 
ter'Lk.  8:49,  indicates  respect  of  higher  classes  for 
Jesus.  Privacy  of  raising  of  Jairus'  daughter  was  due 
to  Pharisaical  o]:)position. 

§60.  Mt.  9  :  27-34.  Txpo  blind  men  and  dumb  demoniac. 
Organic  disease  symbolizing  darkness  of  mind.  v.  27 
"  Son  of  David,"  Messianic  title  used  as  argument  to  ob- 
tain cure,  for  first  time,  v,  28  "  Yea,  Lord" — Christ  re- 
quires faith.  V.  34.  Blasphemous  charge  of  Pharisees 
reiterated. 

§62.  Mt.  9:35-38;  10:1,5-42;  11:1;  Mk.  6:6-13; 
Lk.  9  :  1-6.  Third  circuit  iu  Gal.  Christ  now  sends  out 
the  Twelve.  Opposition  had  become  dangerous.  The 
crisis  of  his  life  was  fast  approaching.  Whatever  he 
would  do  to  impress  the  people  of  Gal.  must  be  done 
quickly.  Design  of  mission  of  Twelve,  a.  To  facilitate 
making  such  impression.  Their  mission  a  practical  com- 
ment on  his  own  words,  '  Harvest  plenty,  laborers  few.' 
b.  To  exercise  apostles  in  independent  action.  Fourth 
step  in  organization  of  his  kingdom.  They  still  held  the 
erroneous  ideas  common  to  the  people,  so  Christ  now 
begins  to  separate  them  from  the  world.  On  their  re- 
turn, he  retires  with  them  to  the  desert  for  further  in- 
struction, c.  To  acquaint  the  people  with  apostles,  as 
those  who  had  been  with  him  from  the  first.  Their  com- 
mission was  temporary  and  national.  Their  circuit 
ended,  their  miraculous  power  ceased.     Into  any  Samari- 


Vo 


106 

tan  village  they  were  not  to  enter.  Plenaiy  apostolic 
authority  conferred  at  Pentecost.  Subject  of  their  teach- 
ing  was,  '  Kingdom  of  heaven  at  hand.'  Their  miracles 
were  limited  to  acts  of  healing.  Anointing  with  oil,  oil 
being  type  of  Holy  Spirit,  shewed  that  they  were  mere 
instruments,  and  made  prominent  in  people's  minds  the 
Spirit's  agency.  Disciples  were  to  be  supported  by  those 
to  whom  they  were  sent.  Mt.  10  :  16  contains  reference 
to  future  opposition  Christ  knew  he  was  to  encounter. 
First  reference  to  coming  trials. 

Note  prominent  place  given  to  his  person  and  author- 
ity ;  whole  work  of  disciples  derives  its  authority  from 
him,  its  trials  are  to  be  borne  for  his  sake. 

§63.  Mt.  14:  1-2,  6-12;  Mk.  6:  14-16;  Lk.  9:  7-9. 
Death  of  John  Baptist.  Date  of  Death  rightly  inferred  to 
be  just  prior  to  third  Pass.,  after  feeding  5000. 

Duration  of  his  imprisonment  depends  on  feast  of 
John  5  :  1.  If  Pass.,  then  16  months  (Robinson),  if  not 
it  varies  from  5  months  to  3  weeks.  John  Bap.  dies  be- 
fore seeing  the  establishment  of  the  kingdom  he  had 
heralded.  His  earl}-  ministry  had  been  full  of  glory,  its 
end  is  filled  with  gloom.  His  fate  accords  with  his  life. 
It  was  well  that  an  ascetic,  a  preacher  of  repentance,  a 
pioneer  for  righteousness  sake,  should  die  a  martyr.  His 
life  had  been  long  enough  to  disclose  the  unity  of  his 
work  and  Christ's  ;  his  death  turned  popular  attention 
to  Jesus.  As  his  imprisonment  had  caused  Christ  to 
withdraw  from  Jndea,  his  deatli  led  him  to  retire  into 
the  wilderness. 

§64.  Mt.l4:  13-21;  Mlv.  6:  30-34;  Lk.  9:  10-17;  John 
6:  1-14.  Return  of  Twelve.  Feeding  of  5000.  John  now 
parallel  with  Syn.  Twelve  begin  to  return  from  their 
mission,  the  disciples  of  John  Bap.  report  their  master's 
death,  hence  Christ  withdraws  to  N.  E.  side  of  Lake,  Mk. 
says  for  rest  and  safety.  Lk.  9:  10;  Place  belonged  to  a 
citj'  called  Bethsaida.  Common  opinion  is  there  were  two 
Bethsaidas,  Bethsaida  of  Gal.,  Bethsaida  Julias,  Others 
think  there  was  but  one,  built  upon  both  sides  of  the 
Jordan  :  but  this  is  improbable,  no  bridge  being  men- 
tioned, and  a  ferry  would  liave  been  very  dangerous. 
Bethsaida  was  an  easy  resort  from  Cap.  and  crowds  fol- 
lowed him,  having  seen  him  embark,  going  around  the 
Lake,  by  land.     Christ  was  moved  witti   compassion  for 


aJ<^<l.cAIj2jC  yt^^Juu<^  (4^  Aj/Cuyi^^^   toXX    JJ  tojL  d^o- 


M'    ~ 


^^iooM  Layu^   U,-rLAy  J^t^-^o^-^^^^     '^^P^^  ^^^^-"^^  y<2^n^j    ^ 


107 

them,  because  they  were  as  sheep  liaving  no  shepherd, 
their  only  teaehers  being  Pharisees.  He  therefore  spends 
the  entire  day  in  giving  instruction. 

Tlie  nearness  of  the  Passover  accounts  for  the  con- 
course of  such  multitudes  in  that  out-of-the-way  place. 
Beside  5,000  men,  there  being  women  and  children,  there 
must  have  been  congregated  at  least  10,000  souls.  Their 

Til 

orderly  arrangement  in  companies,  prevented  all  con- 
fusion and  imposture.  One  of  Christ's  greatest  miracles  ; 
a  species  of  creation  ;  extensive  multiplication  of  created 
things. 

Skeptics  note  following  differences  in  the  accounts: 
1.  As  to  place.  Desert  place,  yet  in  vicinity  of  city. 
John  says  a  mountain.  2.  As  to  conversation.  Syn., 
make  the  discii)les  the  first  to  mention  feeding  the  multi- 
tudes, John  makes  Jesus  first  to  speak.  3.  Repetition 
of  feeding  multitudes  recorded  by  Syn.  increases  diffi- 
culty of  accepting  either  as  genuine.  These  difficulties, 
and  the  inconceivableness  (to  skeptics)  of  a  miracle  dis- 
playing such  creative  power,  have  led  to  unusual  effort 
to  explain  it  away. 

1.  Mijtkical explanation.  No  such  actual  event  occurred. 
Christ's  discourse  concerning  his  body,  Jolm  6,  fur- 
nished m3'thical  basis  for  currrent  tradition.  Strauss 
finds  its  mythical  origin,  in  manna  of  O.  T.  and  in  the 
analogous  miracles  of  Elijah,  (1  Kings  17)  and  Elisha  (2 
Kings  4.)  2.  Naturalistic  expldnation.  Christ  excited  charity 
among  those  in  the  caravan  journeying  to  feast,  to  sup- 
ply from  their  store  of  provisions  those  fainting  with 
hunger.  Some  say  it  was  originally  a  parable  of  Christ's, 
relating  to  spiritual  food,  transformed  into  a  narrative, 
others  imagine  that  Mt.  has  unwittingly  recorded  two 
separate  traditions  of  the  same  occurrence.  Olshausen 
and  Lange,  note  the  compressing  into  a  single  instant  of 
the  many  gradual  processes  of  nature  and  of  art ;  not 
only  the  growth  of  the  grain,  but  also  the  preparation 
of  the  food.  Effect  of  this  miracle  (John  6  :  14.)  :  Peo- 
ple apply  Messianic  titles  to  Christ,  and  attempt  to  force 
him  to  adopt  their  views  of  the  Messiahship,  and  to  com- 
pel him  to  be  their  king.  Lange  remarks  "  the  rabble 
think  they  have  found  their  Bread  King.'''  Disciples  em- 
bark to  cross  the  lake.  The  people  are  sent  away. 
Christ  goes  apart  into  a  mountain  to  pray.  §65.  Omit- 
ted. 


108 

^66.  John  6:  22 — 7:  1.  Discourse  in  Synagogue  at  Ca- 
pernaum.  Only  extended  passage  in  John's  gospel,  the 
scene  of  which  is  laid  in  Gal.  John  not  only  accords 
with  the  Syn.  in  giving  the  miracle,  but  also  makes  the 
same  crises  in  Christ's  lite  and  same  eft'ect  produced  on 
his  followers.  Morning  after  the  miracle,  the  multitudes 
missing  Christ  and  his  disciples,  follow  him  to  Caper- 
naum, This  is  culmination  of  ministry  in  E.  Gal,  False 
Messianic  excitement  has  been  aroused  by  the  miracle  of 
the  loaves.  Christ  therefore,  in  the  syjiagogue  at  Cap. 
delivers  a  searching  discourse  calculated  to  separate  the 
spiritual  from  the  sensual  among  the  crowds  that  followed 
him,  thus  drawing  nearer  to  himself  the  true  disciples 
and  driving  away  the  mere  carnally  minded.  He  unfolds 
the  true  character  of  his  kingdom  ;  its  blessings  spiritual, 
not  material.  Miracle  furnishes  theme  of  the  discourse  ; 
earthly  food  is  not  to  be  sought,  but  himself  the  bread 
which  came  down  from  heaven,  v,  63.  "  The  words 
that  I  speak  unto  you,  they  are  spirit,  aiidthey  are  life," 
is  the  key-note  ot  the  entire  discourse.  Tliree  divisions  : 
1.  ch.  6  :  27-51.  This  the  work  of  God,  men  should  be- 
lieve on  Christ,  and  feed  upon  his  flesh.  Whosoever 
comes  to  Him  shall  not  be  cast  out,  but  shall  obtain  eternal 
life.  2.  Ch.  6  :  51-56  :  Comment  on  preceding  statements. 
Christ's  flesh,  the  true  bread  fiom  heaven.  3.  Ch.  6  : 
59-71.  Effect  of  discourse;  multitudes  are  offended  and 
desert  him. 

Never  before  save  to  Nicodemus,  had  Christ  declared 
that  he  came  down  from  heaven.  He  claims  the  power 
to  impart  spiritual  life.  This  discourse  from  a  mere  man 
would  have  been  blasphemy  and  folly.  This  was  a  test 
event  for  his  own  apostles,  v.  67  "  Will  ye  also  go 
away  ?"  Peter  answers  v.  68  "  To  whom  shall  we  go  ?" 
"  Thy  words  are  hard  but  it  is  a  question  of  despair  with 
us,"  (v.  69)  "  we  believe  and  are  sure  that  thou  art  that 
Christ."  First  time  the  title  of  Messiah  passed  between 
Christ  and  his  most  intimate  friends. 

Critics  object  to  this  discourse  as  unhistorical  :  could 
not  have  been  delivered  previous  to  institution  of  Lord's 
Supper,  must  have  been  wholly  unintelligible  both  to 
Christ  and  apostles,  until  that  event.  Peter's  confession 
of  Christ's  divinity  is  out  of  place  before  Pentecost. 
Ans  :  The  very  mystery  and  difficulty  of  this  discourse 


l/w^  ^  ^?^e.<LeAytcA><3  ,    (/  z^Ct^    &^--<5W/;  ~toc<:    juJ-L<yAy^  jJLi 


'^^^     Ia.(Za^~ 


■p'^Cua^/ix^^4_^e.£^ 


'■^'^ 


Vt^Ayt/—, 


109 

adapt  it  to  the  end  for  which  it  was  intended,  the  sifting 
of  believers  from  unbelievers.  Christ  shows  (vv,  70,  71,) 
tliat  this  discriminating  process  must  be  applied  even  to 
the  Twelve.  "  Have  I  not  chosen  you  twelve,  and  one 
of  you  is  a  devil  ?" 

John  7  :  1  closes  the  ministry  in  E.  Gal.,  and  indicates 
the  extent  to  which  opposition  had  increased  during  this 
period,  by  the  statement  that  Christ  "  would  not  walk 
in  Jewry"  and  was  unable  t<>  attend  the  approaching 
passover  "  because  the  Jews  sought  to  kill  Him." 

THE  MmiSTRY  IX  NORTHERN  GALILEE. 

Second  Period.     Time  6  Months. 

Duration  of  the  Period :  From  the  third  Passover  (coin- 
cident with  death  of  the  Baptist)  to  the  Feast  of  Taber- 
nacles, six  months  later.  The  record  is  contained  in  Mt. 
14:13;  18:35;  Mk.  6  :  30  ;  :  :  50  ;  Luke  9  :  10-56. 
John  gives  all  in  one  verse,  7:  1,  which  corresponds  with 
the  statement  of  the  Synoptists.  It  is  a  period  of  great 
journeyings.  The  order  of  events  in  the  Syn.  is  perfect. 
This  is  because  the  period  is  shorter,  and  there  is  less 
room  for  variations.  Then  the  subjects  of  conversation 
are  closely  connected  with  the  historic  events. 

Characteristics  of  the  Period:  1.  Dangerous  opposition 
causing  Christ's  withdrawal  from  Capernaum.  2.  This 
withdrawal  widened  the  sphere  of  action.  Instead  of 
remaining  in  Capernaum  he  now  goes  into  Phoenicia, 
then  into  Decapolis,  passing  up  the  Jordan  to  Caesarea 
Philippi.  3.  He  had  two  ends  in  view  :  «.  To  avoid  dan- 
ger ;  6.  to  extend  his  useiulness.  Besides,  his  passing 
the  borders  of  the  Holy  Land  signified  the  calling  of  th<e 
Gentiles.  4.  His  teachings  assumed  a  new  character. 
For  the  first  time  he  teaches  publicly  his  death  and  resur- 
rection. 

Object  of  the  Period :  To  strengthen  the  faith  of  his  dis- 
ciples. Hence  he  uses  express  terms  to  teach  his  Mes- 
siahship,  in  contrast  with  the  preceding  period.  The 
disciples  are  now  taught  rather  than  the  people.  The 
main  point  was  to  prepare  them  for  his  approaching 
death.  The  central  event  of  the  preceding  period  was 
the  Sermon  on  t|ie  Mount;  of  this  period,  the  Transfig- 


110 

K 

uration.      The  events  on  these  Mountains  mark  the    be- 
ginning and  end  of  the  Galilean  ministry. 

§67.  Christ  justifies  his  disciples  for  eating  loith  univashed 
hands.  This  charge  of  the  Pharisees  shows  the  strict 
watch  they  kept  over  Christ's  actions.  The  previous 
charge  was  Sabbath-breaking.  jSTow  lie  is  charged  with 
disregarding  the  traditions  of  the  Jews  on  which  the 
Pharisees  laid  so  much  stress.  Christ  applies  to  them, 
Isa.  29  :  13,  and  warns  the  multitude  against  this  ritual 
burden.     Vide  Mt.  15  :  1-20.     Mk.  7  :'l-23. 

§68.  The  daughter  of  a  St/ro- Fhocnician  woman  healed. 
Mt.  15  :  21-28  ;  Mk.  7  :  24l30.  The  border  between 
Galilee  and  Phoenicia  is  called,  from  its  two  larger  cities, 
Tyre  and  Sidon.  Did  Christ  go  to  the  borders,  or  beyond, 
or  through  ?  (Mk.  7  :  24.) 

The  last  view  is  the  best  for  three  reasons:  1.  It 
agrees  best  with  the  account  in  Mk.  2.  It  suits  best  the 
purport  of  the  miracles.  3.  It  is  put  almost  beyond  doubt 
by  the  amended  text — oca  Iidcovoi;  implying  through 
Phcenicia. 

Tyre  and  Sidon  were  opponents  of  the  Theocracy. 
Therefore  the  miracle  shows  Christ's  intended  mission  to 
the  Gentiles.  1.  Because  the  woman  is  called  a  Canaan- 
ite,  which  people  belonged  originally  to  the  land.  2. 
She  is  called  a  Greek,  which  is  tiie  O.  T.  name  for  Gen- 
tile. 3.  Christ's  own  words  :  "  I  am  not  sent  but  unto 
the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel." 
^  §69.  Hcalinq  of  the  deaf  and  dumb  man.     Mt.  15  :  29- 

38  ;  Mk.  7  :  31-37,  8  :  1-9.'  From  Phoenicia  Christ  passes 
south  through  Decapolis,  inhabited  largely  by  Greeks. 
Some  say  he  came  around  south  of  the  sea ;  others  that 
-  he  traveled  directly  east  from  Phoenicia.  It  is  more 
probable  that  he  went  north  as  far  as  Damascus,  thus 
preparing  for  Paul.  The  same  miracles  are  renev>'ed  be- 
cause he  is  in  a  new  countr}-. 

But  the  present  miracle  has  some  peculiarities.  1. 
It  is  the  first  case  of  combined  deafn(^ss  and   dumbness. 

2.  Not  an  absolute  but  a  partial  dumbness — tongue-tied. 

3.  The  mode  of  healing — takes  the  rhan  apart  and  prays.' 
Why?  Because  the  Messianic  question  is  not  prominent, 
and  the  people  are  Polytheists.     Therefore  he  wished  to 

^teach  them  of  the  true  God.     Many  other  miracles  were 
wrought,  and  the  effect  of -them  is  stated   in  Mt.  15  :  31, 


X 


';P^.,aJL^      Ockl,     .e.^iy~^L^.,,^.X^      /?  ot^Iay\.      /^^/L^c^d-e^^ 


r 


tfex/ ti^Cte.  -^U^  d.,a_J^ -vx-^^  ^-^^^^o-r^  cLiy^^Jo  JL&-  Arr^^^^oXi 
A  VV       ^  Sux^  VlA^vu  Vi^cixp-^  ,  -KuyW"  \AHrrdL  (Lt>uA-< 


C3•«^y     IX'VT^' 


Ill 

Then  follows  the  miracle  ot  feeding  the  4000,  wrought 
from  compassion  for  the  people  far  from  home,  and 
especially  to  lead  them  to  the  true  God. 

§70.  The  Pharisees  and  Sadducees  again  rcijuire  a  Sign. 
Mt.  15  :  39  ;  16  :  1-4;  Mk.  8  :  10-12.  Our  Lord  comes 
back  to  Capernaum  and  again  to  Magdala,  a  little  town 
south  of  Capernaum.  For  the  first  time,  the  Pharisees 
and  Sadducees  are  united  against  him,  which  Lange 
thinks  is  proof  that  the  Sanhedrim  had  passed  official 
measures  against  him.  For  the  fourth  time  the  Pharisees 
seek  a  sign,  and  Christ'8  answer  is  recorded  in  iMt.  16: 
2-3. 

§72.  Blind  Man  of  Bethsaida  healed.  This  miracle  is 
mentioned  by  Mark  alone.  It  is  private,  and  the  cure  is 
gradual,  to  illustrate,  as  some  think,  the  gradual  enlight- 
enment of  the  regenerated  soul. 

§73.  Peter's  Confession  at  Cxsarea  Philippi.  Mt.  16  : 
13-20:  Mark  8:    27-30;  Luke   9:   18-21.     Luke  men-  , 

tions  these  events  because  so  important.     C.  Philippi  lay  *^   p^-^^-Yy 
at  the  base  of  Mt.  Hermon,  which  is  about  8000  ft.  high.    .OnJ/k, 
The    sources    of  the   Jordan    are    here.     (Vide   Smith's 
Diet.)       ^pUjz_    iuJz^cJX..^^  ^ — 

Result  of  the  Galilean  Ministrg.  As  a  whole,  the  re- 
sult has  not  been  to  lead  any  but  the  disciples  to  believe 
that  he  is  the  Messiah.  This  truth  is  not  popularly  pro- 
claimed. He  still  enjoins  them  not  to  say  that  he  is  the 
Christ.  But  the  truth  is  so  clear  that  it  brings  out  Peter's 
famous  confession  :  "  Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  son  of  the 
living  God."  Christ's  reply  contains  ixxb^aia  for  the  first 
time.  It  is  used  only  once  besides  this  in  the  Gospels. 
(Matt.  18:  17.) 

The  Rationalists  confess  that  the  agreement  of  the 
Evangelists  here  denotes  a  crisis  in  the  life  of  Christ,  but 
they  dispute  as  to  its  nature.  Baur  and  Strauss  say  that 
"  Son  of  Man  "  (Mt.  16 :  13)  had  not  before  been  consid- 
ered a  Messianic  expression.  The  change,  therefore,  was 
from  an  idea  secretly  and  suddenly  entertained  by  Christ 
to  its  open  profession.  Schenkel  thinks  the  crisis  to  be 
that  after  this  he  offered  himself  for  the  first  time  as  the 
Messiah. 

But  these  theories  require  rejection  of  the  Gospel  by 
John,  and  they  subvq^-t.  the  whole  history.  The  only 
thing  true  is  that  the  claim  to  be  the  Messiah  had  not 


112 

been  made  prominent  before.  But  the  Disciples  had 
recognized  him  as  Son  of  God  before  this.  Vide  Mt. 
14  :  33.  He  now  makes  his  chaim  public,  and  goes  on  to 
teach  that  his  kingdom  would  be  independent  of  the  old 
Theocracy.  "Upon  this  rock  will  I  build  my  Church." 
That  is,  the  doctrine  contained  in  Peter's  confession 
would  be  its  corner-stone. 

§74.  Prediction  of  his  Death  and  Resurrection.  Mt.  16  : 
21-28 ;  Mk.  8  :  31-38  ;  9:1;  Lk.  9  :  22-24.  This  is  a 
new  element  in  Christ's  teaching.  The  Syn.  recognized 
this  transition.  Our  Lord  shows  them  that  he  had  not 
come  to  set  up  the  material  kingdom  that  they  expected, 
but  that  he  was  to  suiter  death.  This  shocked  them,  and 
Peter  says  :  "•  Be  it  far  from  thee,  Lord.'.'*^  These  predic- 
tions are  important  in  three  respects  : 

1.  In  correcting  the  mistaken  ideas  of  liis  Apostles. 
These  predictions  prepared  them  for  that  suffering  which 
they  had  not  anticipated. 

2.  In  preserving  their  faith.  What  would  have  be- 
come of  them  when  Christ's  death  came,  without  these 
predictions  ? 

3.  Although  they  did  not  apprehend  his  words  at  the 
time,  they  did  remember  them  during  Passion  Week 
(Luke  24:  7-8).  The  Divinity  of  the  Savior  gleams 
through  these  predictions  in  a  striking  manner.  They 
are  very  minute,  a.  As  to  the  place — Jerus.,  which  he 
had  avoided,  h.  His  death  was  not  to  be  a  local  but  an 
otKcial  and  national  event,  e.  The  mode  of  his  suffering 
was  predicted.  He  was  to  be  "  put  to  death  "  but  was 
to  rise  I'gain  on  the  third  day. 

The  Rationalists  make  strong  assaults  upon  these  pas- 
sagfis.  I.  They  claim  discrepancy  in  the  accounts.  1. 
John  is  enigmatical  while  the  Syn.  are  plain.  2.  John's 
references  cover  the  whole  life,  while  the  Syn.  refer  only 
to  the  end.  3.  In  John  the  words  are  addressed  to  the 
multitude;  in  the  Syn.  to  the  Disciples.  4.  Christ  ap- 
peals to  the  O.  T.  and  mistakes  its  meaning.  He  avails 
himself  of  certain  Messianic  passages  which  the  Ration- 
alists deny  to  be  so, 

Ans  :  a.  Christ  appeals  to  the  O.  T.  as  proof  only  to 
those  wlio  believe  in  theO.  T.  b.  The  objection  is  based 
on  the  false  assumption  that  only  isolated  passages  refer 
to  the  Messiah,  whereas  the  whole  O,  T.,  especially  the 


^y^rt^djU.^LuJb    JuoUA^^M",         l^^-^^'ctuLAJC    jg^xA^i^J-^     txA.L>LX_ 


out/-    aL--^i^.f-9 


113 

whole  eerenionijil  law,  refers  to  Ciirist.  He  is  the  key 
to  it  all.  c.  The  exegesis  on  which  these  discrepancies 
are  based  is  accepted  only  by  unbelieving  Jews  and 
Rationalists. 

II.  Again  it  is  objected  that  if  Christ  predicted  his 
death  in  this  way,  the  surprise  and  vacillation  and  in- 
credibility of  the  Disciples,  when  his  trial  and  death  did 
occur,  are  inexplicable. 

Ans:  a.  Prophecies  however  explicit  require  fnltill- 
ment  as  the  key  to  their  signiticancy  and  inspiration. 
Although  the  second  advent  of  Christ  has  been  foretold, 
how  much  do  we  know  about  it? 

b.  Again  this  was  a  time  of  great  excitement.  The 
Disciples  were  struck  dumb  for  the  moment,  and  had  not 
sutticient  calmness  to  reason  about  these  matters. 

c.  The  true  interpretation  of  these  prophecies  contra- 
dicted all  their  notions  of  the  Messiah.  Besides, 'O.  T. 
prophecies  were  not  all  to  be  fulfilled  in  his  present 
advent. 

III.  These  predictions  simply  a  shrewd  forecast.  His 
suffering  would  be  at  Jerus.  because  he  could  bring  that 
about.  But  the  question  arises.  How  did  Christ  know 
he  would  not  be  arrested  in  Galilee  on  this  theory?  To 
obviate  this,  Strauss  says  tlie  whole  matter  was  incorpo- 
rated with  the  record  and  is  without  foundation. 

Intermediate  Position  of  Theistic  critics:  These  predictions 
belong  to  Cesarean  period.  Before  this  Christ  had  ex- 
pected to -convert  the  nation.  But  experience  taught 
that  death  was  necessary  to  victory. 

Ans  :  1.  It  is  inconsistent  with  the  record  in  Mt.  12  : 
40  ;    23  :  38,  39. 

2.  This  theory  is  inconsistent  with  itself.  For  if  the 
Resurrection  was  not  an  actual  fact,  why  did  the  Apostles 
suffer  martyrdom  for  their  belief  in  it? 

3.  Christ's  knowledge  of  the  O.  T.  renders  it  impossi- 
ble (Isa.  49  :  3.)  The  Sceptics  themselves  claim  that  he 
got  his  knowledge  from  O.  T.,  and  by  a  false  exegesis 
applied  it  to  himself.  Hence  on  their  own  ground  he 
had  a  definite  conception  of  his  sufferings  and  death. 

Another  objection  attempts  to  relieve  Christ  from  all 
participation  in  the  tlieory  of  the  Atonement.  But  see 
how  one  sceptic  devours  another.  For  some  of  them 
say  that  all  such  passages  are  an  interpolation,  while 
otliers  deny  that  they  teach  the  Atonement. 


114 

Transition  Period.  Thus  far  Christ  had  addressed  the 
Twelve.  But  he  now  turns  to  the  multitude.  He  fore- 
warns them  of  the  cost  of  foUowinoj  him — cjreat  self-denial 
required,  yet  with  the  rewards  of  eternal  life.  But  those 
who  do  not  follow  him  must  suffer  the  loss  of  their  souls, 
(This  was  the  last  N.  T.  passage  commented  on  by  Dr. 
Addison  Alexander  just  oefore  his  death.) 

§75.  The  Iransfiguration.  The  events  of  this  section 
occurred  about  a  week  after  the  preceding  conversation. 
No  difficulty  in  the  fact  that  Mt.  says  six  days  and  Lk. 
eight,  for  both  speak  of  one  week,  only  one  includes,  and 
the  other  excludes,  the  first  and  last  days.  Besides  Lk. 
says  w^s}—"-  about.''  Tradition  makes  Mt.  Tabor  in  Gal. 
the  Mt.  of  Transfig.  But  this  goes  back  only  to  fourth 
cent.,  and  then  jiot  to  Palestine.  Mt.  and  Mk.  say  "  a 
high  mountain,"  and  Lk.  "  the  mountain."  Robinson 
and  Stanley  object  to  Tabor  bee.  at  that  time  occupied 
by  a  fortified  city.  Last  events  occurred  in  the  region 
of  Caesarea  Phiiippi,  Lightfoot :  "Evangelists  intimate 
no  change  of  place."  Besides,  Mk.  9 :  30  says  :  "And 
departing  thence  they  passed  tlirongh  Galilee,"  implying 
that  thej-  were  not  then  in  Gal.  Current  opinion  favors 
Mt.  Hermon. 

Taking  witb  him  Peter,  James  and  Joiin,  he  goes  into 
the  mountain  to  pray,  and  then  took  place  the  Trans- 
figuration. What  the  Transfiguration  was  is  a  matter  of 
much  conjecture.  It  is  sufficient  to  know  that  Christ's 
personal  identity  remained.  (Farrar,  chap.  36.)  Peter 
proposed  to  make  three  Tabernacles,  or  tents,  that  they 
might  dwell  there.  Then  a  cloud  came,  wliich  is  always 
a  sign  of  Jehovah's  presence,  and  on  lookingaround  they 
saw  Jesus  alone.  ^ 

Three-fold  design  vfthe  Transjiuration  : 

1.  It  afforded  the  Disciples  a  new  proof  from  Heaven 
of  Christ's  divinity,  thereby  strengthening  their  faith  for 
future  conflict. 

2.  It  was  necessary  for  Christ's  own  spiritual  support 
and  comfort,  before  entering  upon  the  agony  and  death 
which  were  near  at  hand — analogous  to  the  baptism 
before  the  Temptation. 

3.  The  design  was  symbolical — setting  forth   the   na- 

rture  of  Christ's  kingdom,  and  the  glory  fhat  shall  follow 
those  that  suffer  for  it.     A  specimen  of  the  heavenly  glory 


\JL'    (XhJ^C 


115 

and  of  the  resurrection.  Also  shows  tlie  essential  one- 
ness of  Christ's  kingdom  with  the  0.  T.  dispensation. 
Moses  and  Elias  representative  men — one  tlie  giver,  the 
other  the  champion  of  the  Law.  These  two  hist  points 
set  forth  in  II.  Peter  1  :  16-18.  Christ  charged  them  to 
tell  no  man,  because  the  multitudes  had  not  faith  to  un- 
derstand the  scene,  and  the  Disciples  themselves  could  not 
understand  "  what  the  rising  from  the  dead  should  mean." 
In  the  next  four  sections,  we  have  a.  the  healing  of 
the  demoniac  child,  6.  the  second  prediction  of  Christ's 
death  and  resurrection,  c.  the  miraculous  provision  of  the 
tribute-money,  and  (/.  the  contentions  of  the  Disciples  as 
to  who  should  be  greatest  in  Christ's  kingdom. 

LAST  JOURNEY  TO  JERUSALEM. 

Our  Lord  now  begins  his  last  journey  to  Jerusalem, 
thereto  renew  the  evidence  of  his  Messiahship.  The 
time  is  from  Tabernacles  to  the  Passover,  six  months  lack- 
ing one  week. 

Why  is  Luke  so  full  ?  a.  Because  he  is  supplementary. 
b.  It  accords  with  his  plan  to  bring  out  the  personal  re- 
lations and  human  sympathies  of  Christ. 

The  question  of  Harmony  is  very  difficult,  because 
John  gives  us  five  chapters  which  must  go  into  the 
Synoptic  narrative.  Here  is  the  problem  :  The  Synopt- 
ists,  after  the  Galilean  Ministry,  relate  a  journey  to  Jeru- 
salem as  if  it  were  the  last.  But  John  records  three  }ouv- 
neys:  (1)  A  journey  to  the  feast  of  Tabernacles  in  Octo- 
ber, (John  7  :  10.)  (2)  A  journey  to  the  Feast  of  Dedi- 
cation in  December  (John  10 :  22-23.)  On  account  of 
opposition  Jesus  retires  to  Bethany  in  Perea,  but  the 
death  of  Lazarus  brings  him  to  Bethany,  near  Jerusalem. 
Then  on  account  of  further  opposition  he  retires  to 
Ephraim,  (John  11  :  54.)  (3)  He  sets  out  from  Ephraim 
for  Jerusalem  "  six  days  before  the  Passover"  (John  12  : 
1.)  Where  was  Jesus  during  the  two  months  between 
the  Tabernacles  and  Dedication  ? 

How  are  these  to  be  harmonized  ?  It  is  best  to  con- 
fess that  we  have  not  enough  material  to  settle  the  ques- 
tion satisfactorily.  DeWette  thinks  the  chapters  in  Luke 
are  a  collection  of  unhistorical  material  which  the  writer 
did  not  know  where  to  place.  Exegetical  objections  to 
this  view;  a.  The  unity  of  the  discourses  in  Luke.     b.  All 


116 

the  material  furnished  belongs  to  this  period.  Hengsten- 
berg  thinks  no  order  is  discernible  between  Luke  and 
John.  Schleierinacher,  Olshausen  and  Neander  think 
that  the  accounts  of  the  two  journeys  are  blended, 
viz.,  the  journeys  to  the  Tabernacle  and  Passover.  The 
narrative  of  the  first  two  come  in  at  Luke  18  :  35.  They 
record  no  conversations  or  incidents  previous  to  their  be- 
coming parallel  with  Luke. 

V  Greswell  makes  all  the  Synoptists  connect  with  the 
last  journey  in  John.  Then  Luke  9  :  51  is  parallel  with 
John  11:55.  According  to  this  view  the  Synoptists 
pass  over  the  period  and  record  only  the  last  journey  to 
Jerusalem  just  before  the  Passover.  By  this  view  the 
unity  of  Luke  is  preserved,  and  the  Synoptists  appear 
to  record  only  one  journey.  But  the  difficult}*  is  that 
early  in  Luke's  narration  Christ  is  brought  into  the  house 
of  Mary  and  Martha  at  Bethany,  (chap.  10)  and  then  in 
chap.  17:  11  he  is  passing  through  Galilee  and  Samaria. 
Greswell  thinks  Luke  refers  to  another  village  near 
Jerusalem.  But  this  would  make  the  journey  protracted 
and  irregular.  Again  John  says  our  Lord  i)as9ed  some 
time  in  Ephraini,  after  raising  Lazarus. 
^^  Wieseler  fixes  on  three  points  in  Luke  where  it  is  said 
^  Jesus  was  going  to  Jems'.'  and  makes  them  correspond 
with  John's  journeys  : 

1.  To  Tabernacles,  Luke  9  :  51  compares  witli  John  7  :  10. 

2.  To  Bethany,  '^  13:22         "  "         "11:1. 

3.  To  Passover,  "  17  :  11         "  "         "  11  :  55. 

Arguments  for  Wieseler' ?,  via n  :  It  is  claimed  that  the 
narrative  in  John^te  in  to  the  break  in  Luke,  e.  g.,  we 
are  told  that  the  journey  to  the  Tabernacles  was  made 
secretly.  This  agrees  with  Luke's  statement  that  he 
went  through  Samaria.  The  common  way  was  tli rough 
Perea.  The  Samaritans  reject  him  because  his  "  face 
was  set  towards  Jerus."  Here  comes  in  the  parable  of 
the  good  Samaritan.  Such  striking  coincidences  all 
through  have  won  over  many  supporters.  Ellicott  fol- 
lows it  in  full.  Tischendorf  qualifies  it  l)y  saying  that 
it  is  not  so  certain  as  it  seems  to  be. 

Objections.  1.  Lack  of  positive  evidence.  Butinsuch 
a  case  we  look  only  for  probabilities.  2.  Luke  purports 
to  give  only  one  journey.  Ans.  :  Luke  does  not  say  there 
w\as  but  o>ze  journey.     3.  Luke  9  :  51  seems  to  refer  to  a 


^X    C^^^.^^^-^CA-jlIXL      CUu    ^      C^^A^^  S    yiA^O/X^cu  t  '^^>.-<ly^-^^ 


^ 


J^oA^z^L^^^^'  i^2_^  ^.^t.,^^,^^...^  ,        M((^  c^CcJa'g  Uh^>^ 


■   ^l^XJiyUJ' 


117 

period  just  before  his  deatli.  Aiis.  :  Could  as  well  refer 
to  the  whole  period  of  six  months.  4.  Luke  18  :  22  must 
mean,  it  is  said,  into  or  wp  t  •  Jerus.  But  this  interpreta- 
tion denies  that  cj'c  ever  has  the  sense  of  direction.  5. 
The  plan  implies  a  sojourn  in  Jerusalem  from  the  Taber- 
nacles to  Dedication.  This  is  said  to  be  contrar}'  to 
John  12  :  1.  Tischendorf  takes  an  exception  to  Wieseler 
and  makes  the  Dedication  occur  in  John  10:  22.  An- 
drews agrees  as  to  the  last  two  journeys,  but  makes  this 
difference:  He  considers  Luke  9:51  the  journey  to 
Dedication,  and  makes  it  parallel  with  John  7  :  10,  whicli 
passage  he  makes  refer  to  a  final  departure.  Objections 
to  Andrews:  1.  It  assumes  a  new  return  to  Galilee  after 
Dedication.  2.  It  is  unnatural  to  put  John  7  :  8,  9  at  the 
close  of  the  Galilean  ministry.  The}-  belong  to  this 
period  of  journeyings. 

Robinson  makes  Luke  13:  22 — 19:  28  the  last  jour- 
ney; Luke  1^:17 — 11:33  the  journey  between  Taber- 
nacles and  Dedication,  and  Luke  11  :  33 — 13:  10  he  i)Uts 
in  the  ministry  in  Eastern  Galilee.  Objections:  1.  It  is 
arbitrary.  2.  It  breaks  up  .fhe  connection  just  where 
commentators  find  a  striking  nnit\-.  3.  Robinson  him- 
self says,  "  I  suggest."  The  sceptics  say  that  this  diver- 
sity proves  the  record  unhistorical. 

Coincidences  of  John  and  Luke:  1.  Both  represent  Jesus, 
after  the  Galilean  Ministr}',  as  entering  upon  an  extended 
period  of  journeyings.  2.  Both  agree  that  the  region 
was  Judea  and  Ferea,  3.  Both  agree  that  it  was  tow- 
ard Jerus.  4.  Both  agree  as  to  the  character  of  tlie 
works  and  teaching,  for  both  refer  to  a  period  of  hostility 
which  brings  out  declaration  of  his  Divinity. 

Design  of  the  Period:  A  more  open  avowal  of  Mes- 
siahship — at  the  feast  and  while  journeying.  He  offers 
himself  again  at  Jerus.  and  is  rejected.  Notice  the  ad- 
vance in  the  doctrine  of  his  person.  He  speaks  of  com- 
ing forth  from  God;  of  his  pre-existence  ;  of  his  one- 
ness with  the  Father;  of  his  being  the  source  of  life. 
But  he  still  withholds  the  titles,  Messiali  and  Christ. 

The  sphere  of  labor  is  now  changed  from  Galilee  to 
Judea.  In  the  Synoptists  this  is  brought  out  in  the 
journeyings  through  Perea.  The  opposition  increases. 
The  Pharisees  seek  to  break  down  his  popularity  by  put- 
ting difficult  questions  so  worded  that  a  direct  answer 


118 

would  ofFend  one  partj*  or  anotlier.  For  example,  the 
question  about  divorce.  On  the  other  hand,  our  Lord 
delivers  a  series  of  discourses  against  the  Pharisees, 
warning  tlie  people  against  them.  John  gives  evidence 
of  the  covert  purpose  of  the  Pharisees  to  put  Christ  to 
death,  John  7  :  25. 

Christ  now  proceeds  to  give  private  instruction  to  his 
disciples,  in  reference  to  the  change  so  soon  to  occur. 
He  gives  new  charges,  prophecies  and  parables.  (The 
numbering  of  the  sections,  from  this  point,  is  irregular, 
but  Tischendorf  s  plan  is  preferred.)  o—^ 

V_    ;^  r      §81.  Final  Departure  from  Galilee.     Luke's  expression 

JVC      (jl^'^^is  remarkable:   "He  steadfastly  set  his  face  to  go   to 
if^    i      Jerusalem.'"     The    journey    was    not    compulsory    but 

^J'       \'^      voluntary. 

VQ/^\;^    •  Objections:   1.  He  said  to  his  brethi-en  that  he  would 

,    '  not  go,  and  afterwards  went  up  secret!}-  (John  7:  8-11.) 

^  It  is  claimed  that  this  is  either  vacillation  or  deception. 

Ans  :  Our  Lord's  words  refer  to  the  time  and  manner  of 
his  going.  Did  not  say  he  was  not  going,  but  "  I  go  up 
not  yet."     He  refused  to  go  in  the  public  procession. 

2.  Again,  it  is  said  that  the  rejection  of  his  messen- 
gers at  the  Samaritan  village  (Lk.  9  :  58)  does  not  agree 
with  the  favorable  reception  in  John  4th. 

Ans:  The  latter  was  at  the  beginning,  the  former  at 
the  close  of  his  Galilean  ministry.  The  rejection  by  the 
Samaritans  is  now  caused  b}-  their  prejudices.  Christ's 
face  now  toward  Jerus.  He  was  therefore  regarded  as 
favoring  the  Jews. 

3.  Again  it  is  said  Lk.  9 :  52  represents  Christ's  last 
journey  to  be  through  Samaria.  But  Mt.  and  Mk.  make 
it  through  Perea.  Andrews  (p.  361)  answers  this  by  the 
reasonable  supposition  that  he  started  to  go  through 
Samaria,  but  after  his  rejection  changed  his  plan  and 
went  through  Perea. 

§83.  Feast  of  Tabernacles.  This  was  one  of  the  great 
annual  feasts  of  the  Jews,  (Lev.  23  :  34)  to  commemorate 
the  Divine  goodness  in  the  Wilderness,  and  also  to  show 
gratitude  for  the  rich  fruits  of  the  season.  It  was  the 
most  joyous  of  all  tlie  Jewish  festivals, — so  joyous  that 
Plutarch  mistook  its  character  and  called  it  a  festival  \n 
honor  of  Bacchus. 

There  was  a  division  of  sentiment  concerning  Christ 
among  those  at  Jerus.     Some  said,  "  He  is  a  good  man  : 


vO^   , 


/ti(^f-v^v>^    ^WJL.^'V-    dUtO     AA>-OtA.    rva>4.A.tA^KjL^  4^ r)fc-<i-2A>^ 


(p. 


A^    /  Z^ 


119 

others  said  Nay,  but  he  deceiveth  the  people"  (John  7: 
12.)  Another  expression  of  John  is  noticeable:  "  How- 
beit  no  man  spake  openly  of  him  for  fear  of  the  Jews." 
This  refers  to  the  Jews  who  opposed  Christ.  The  peo- 
ple did  not  know  which  side  to  take,  because  it  was  un- 
certain wliat  the  Sanhedrim  would  do. 

Historic  Points:  1.  Christ  takes  u[>  his  discourse  with 
the  Pharisees  where  he  liad  left  oft' (John  7  :  23)  eighteen 
months  before.  The  miracle  to  which  he  refers  in  v.  21, 
is  the  healing  of  the  impotent  man  at  Bethesda,  which 
was  followed  by  the  cliarge  of  Sabbath-breaking.  He 
here  openly  cliarges  them  with  their  purpose  to  kill  him. 

2.  The  emphatic  statements  in  verses  28-31  of  his 
Divinity.  This  gave  great  oftense  to  some,  but  no  man 
laid  liands  on  him,  and  many  believed  in  him,  asking 
".When  Christ  cometh  will  he  do  more  miracles  than 
these  which  this  man  hath  done  ?" 

3.  The  ofticial  act  of  the  Sanhedrim  to  arrest  him,  be- 
cause of  his  influence  over  the  people.  All  this  on  the 
first  day.  Now  we  come  to  the  second  day — "  that  great 
day  of  the  feast  "  which  was  the  last.  Jesus  stood  and 
cried  :  "  If  any  man  thirst,  let  him  come  unto  me  and 
drink."  The  water  which  suggested  this  invitation  is 
supposed  to  have  been  that  which  was  taken  from  the 
pool  of  Siloam  on  each  of  the  seven  days  and  poured 
upon  the  ground  in  commemoration  of  the  miraculous 
provision  of  water  in  the  Wilderness.  In  it  Christ  saw 
a  type  of  that  Spirit  which  the  world  was  to  receive 
through  him.  The  otiicers  report  to  the  Sanhedrim  that 
they  were  unable  to  arrest  him.  The  reason  they  give 
is  remarkable:  -'Never  man  spake  like  this  man  " — 
showing  the  strong  impression  Christ's  personal  bearing 
had  made  upon  them.  The  answer  is  received  with 
ridicule  :     "  Are  ye  also  deceived  ?" 

Except  for  the  remonstrance  of  Nicodemus  (v.  51), 
the  Sanhedrim  would  have  condemned  Christ,  immedi- 
ately. To  him  they  sneeringly  replied  :  "  Art  thou  also 
of  Galilee?  Search  and  look,  for  out  of  Galilee  ariseth 
no  prophet."  But  in  the  last  statement  they  were  mis- 
taken. 

§84.  Woman  taken  in  Adultery.  Most  critics  reject  the 
first  eleven  verses  of  the  8th  of  John.  The  external  and 
grammatical  evidence  against  it  is  very  strong.     Tres^elles 


120 

claims  that  it  is  not  original  with  John,  but  is  an  ancient 
extra-canoiiical  record  of  an  actual  fact.  The  passage  is 
not  in  tlie  Sinaitic,  Peshito,  A.,  B.,  or  C,  uncial  MSS. 
It  is  found  only  in  the  Vatican  MS.  and  some  of  the  early 
Fathers.  But  it  seems  to  accord  too  well  with  the  chai-- 
acter  of  Christ,  to  be  an  invention. 

§85.  Discourses  in  the  Temple.  The  effect  of  striking  out 
John  8:  2-11  would  be  to  bring  all  these  discourses  on 
the  last  day  of  the  feast.  But  it  is  more  natural  to  con- 
sider the  references  in  John  7  :  37  and  8  :  14  to  relate  to 
two  different  days.  If  this  be  correct,  there  are  two 
prominent  periods  of  teaching:  (1)  8  :  12-21  (2)  8  :  21- 
59. 

In  the  first,  Christ  proclaims  himself  the  Light  of  the 
world.  The  Pharisees  object  to  his  bearing  witness  of 
himself,  and  say  his  record  is  not  true.  Our  Lord  proves 
its  truth,  a.  by  saying  that  the  Father  bears  testimony  of 
him;   and  b.  by  declaring  his  oneness  with  the  Father. 

In  the  second,  he  discourses  of  his  origin,  of  his  going 
away  and  of  their  dying  in  their  sins.  He  charges  them 
with  the  design  of  killirig  him,  and  alludes  to  the  man- 
ner of  his  death  in  verse  28th  :  "When  ye  have  lifted 
up  the  son  of  man." 

The  pre-existence  of  Christ  is  asserted  by  him  in  ex- 
press terms.  The  Jews  regard  the  declaration  as  blas- 
phemy and  give  way  to  rage.  They  tear  up  tiie  stones 
from  the  Temple  pavement  to  put  him  to  death  as  a  blas- 
phemer. But  Jesus  hid  himself,  and  so  got  out  of  their 
way. 

§90.  Healing  of  a  man  blind  from,  birth,  on  the  Sabbath. 
Robinson  postpones  this  till  just  before  the  Dedication. 
Butthe  prevailing  opinion  isthat  it  cornesin  immediately 
after  stoning  referred  to  in  John  8  :  59.  In  proof  of 
Messiahship,  Jesus  opens  eyes  of  blind  man.  The  Phari- 
sees after  conversing  with  the  latter,  are  enraged  because 
he  adheres  to  Jesus,  and  cast  him  out  of  the  Synagogue. 
[Farrar,  chap.  41,  Vol.  II.]  The  effect  of  this  miracle  was 
to  produce  a  division  among  the  people.  Many  of  them 
claimed  that  he  had  a  devil.  Others,  that  a  devil  could 
not  open  the  eyes  of  the  blind.  (John  10  :  19-21.) 
Qo^§^  The  Sec enty  sent  oat.  Tisch.  places  this  section  in 
the  interval  between  Dedication  and  Tabernacles  ; 
Wies.  while  Jesus  is  on  the  way  to  Tabernacles.     Place  : 


121 

Majority  say  Perea,  some  Gal.  Best,  Perea,  Judea  and 
Samaria.  The  design  has  a  clear  reference  to  Christ's 
coming  once  more  to  oft'er  himself  as  the  Messiah.  Meyer  : 
Tliis  whole  jonrney  intended  to  present  to  the  people 
opportunity  for  tinal  decision.  Andrews:  Their  mission 
was  not  only  to  preach  tlie  kingdom,  but  to  proclaim  the 
King.  In  addition,  probably,  a  desire  to  accustom  the 
disciples  to  their  work,  and  familiarize  the  people  with 
them  as  witnesses  of  the  truth.  Some  say  that  the  second 
order  of  church  officers, viz.,  Presbyters,  is  here  established. 
Wies. :  The  Seventy  represent  the  calling  of  the  Gentiles. 
Their  mission  was  the  counterpart  of  that  of  the  Twelve. 
The  latter  chosen  in  reference  to  the  twelve  tribes;  the 
seventy  with  ref."»rence  to  the  seventy  nations  of  the  Gen- 
tiles for  which  prayers  were  offered,  or  the  number  may 
Ijave  reference  to  the  seventy-  elders  of  Isi-ael,  or  to  tlie 
Sanhedrim.  But  the  leading  idea  seems  to  be  a  visita- 
tion of  tlie  whole  countrv.  (Vide  Ebrard,  pp.  322-3  ; 
Andrews,  pp.  352-355;  Farrar,  Vol.  II.,  ch.  42.  Also 
comp.  Gen.  10  and  Gen.  46 :  27  with  Deut.  32  :  8.) 

Objections  :  I.  Silence  of  the  other  Evangelists,  Lk. 
being  the  only  one  that  mentions  the  Seventy.  Ans  :  a. 
The  objection  would  be  valid  if  the  Seventy  had  been  set 
up  as  a  permanent  order  in  the  church.  Other  Evangel- 
ists silent  concerning  a  great  portion  of  this  period,  but 
say  nothing  contrary-  to  Lk's  account. 

II.  Instructions  to  Seventy  and  Twelve  so  similar  that 
the  Evangelists  give  different  accounts  of  same  occur- 
rence. Ans  :  a.  The  instructions  were  similar  because 
the  duties  were  similar,  h.  But  there  is  an  important 
difference  in  the  fact  that  a  permanent  commission  was 
given  to  the  Twelve  but  not  to  the  Seventy.  Ebrard  : 
Address  to  Twelve  has  the  character  of  induction  into  a 
permanent  office,  whereas  that  to  Seventy  has  reference  to 
a  single  task. 

III.  Symbolical  use  of  number  Seventy  is  proof  of  a 
later  date,  and  of  artifice.  Ans:  Some  number  of  mes- 
senger^ must  have  been  chosen,  and  whatever  it  might 
be  the  Sceptics  would  be  sure  to  find  fault  with  it. 

§89.  Tlie  Seventy  return.  Difficult  to  assign  this  section 
with  any  certainty.  The  Seventy  probably  returned, 
hoo  by  two,  bringing  a  glorious   report  (Lk.  10:  17-21.) 

§86.  The  Good  Samaritan.  Lk.  10:  25-37.  In  the 
parable  Christ  teaches  that  God  may  make  distinctions 


122 

among  men,  but  men  may  not.     All  men   are  our    neigh- 
bors.    Hence,  we  must  do  good  to  all  men. 

Second  Group  of  Parables  :  There  are  seventeen  in  all, 
closely  connected  and  illustrating  personal  duties — four- 
teen of  them  peculiar  to  Lk.  Three  things  worthy  of 
notice:  1.  Their  appropriateness  to  the  plan  of  Luke's 
gospel.  They  set  forth  God's  mercy  to  sinners,  and  the 
duties  consequent  therefrom.  Mt.'s  group  of  seven  all 
addressed  to  the  people  and  the  Disciples  :  Lk.'s  intend- 
ed for  publicans  and  sinners.  Mt.'s  relate  to  the  king- 
dom of  God  ;  Lk.'s  point  out  the  way  of  salvation.  2. 
Their  appropriateness  to  the  period  of  Christ's  life,  in 
which  he  finally  offered  himself  to  the  nation.  3.  They 
are  directed  against  prominent  errors  of  the  Pharisees. 

Olassijicaiion  of  these  Parables.  They  may  be  reduced 
to  a  four-fold  division: 

L  Those  showing  the  love  of  God  in  Christ  as  the 
source  of  all  blessing,  a.  To  the  poor  and  lowly — para- 
ble of  Marriage  Supper,  b.  As  preventing  grace — Lost 
Sheep,  Lost  Piece  of  Money,  Prodigal  Son. 

II.  Those  showing  the  means  of  obtaining  God's 
mercy,  and  the  resulting  duties,  a.  Importunity  in 
prayer — Friend  at  Midnight,  Importunate  Widow,  b. 
Repentance  and  humility — parable  of  Pharisee  and 
Publican,  c.  Watchful  preparation — the  Waiting  Ser- 
vants (Lk.  12  :  27).  d.  Counting  the  cost — Building  a 
Tower,  c.  Universal  love  to  our  neighbor— the  Good 
Samaritan,  f.  [Jsing  this  world's  o-oods  without  abusing 
them — Unjust  Steward. 

HI.  Those  showing  the  judgments  which  follow  neg- 
lect or  abuse  of  God's  mercy,  a.  Abuse  of  God's  grace 
— Barren  Fig-tree.  b.  Abuse  of  God's  providence — Rich 
Man  that  built  Laro^er  Barns,  c.  Abuse  of  Wealth  — 
Dives  and  Lazarus,  d.  Danger  of  partial  moral  refor- 
mation. Leads  tc  worse  state  than  the  first — Return  of 
Unclean  Spirit.     (Lk.  11 :  24.) 

IV.  Those  showing  that  rewards  and  punishments  are 
to  be  proportioned  to  fidelity  of  stewardship — Parable 
of  Ten  Talents — Mustard  Seed — Leaven. 

Sections  48,  49  and  51  are  parallel  with  Mt.  12,  and 
for  this  reason  Robinson  treats  them  together.  Vide 
small  syllabus,  p.  12. 

§91.  Feast  of  Dedication.  Previous  to  this  feast,  (John 
10  :  22)  Jesus    had  retired  to  Bethany  in  Perea.     Why 


123 

return  to  Jerus.  ?  Not  merely  to  keep  the  Feast,  since 
the  whole  land  kept  it,  but  to  confront  the  Pharisees. 
Not  a  feast  of  the  Law,  but  instituted  by  Judas  Macca- 
baeus,  164  B.  C,  in  honor  of  the  cleansing  of  the  Tem- 
ple, and  the  rebuilding  of  the  Altar,  after  the  Expulsion 
of  the  Syrians.  Season  :  The  only  feast  in  the  winter- 
time, which,  according  to  Wieseler,  fell  this  year  on 
Dec.  20.  (Vide  Farrar.  chap.  45.)  Ohrist  was  walking 
in  this  place  because  it  was  winter,  the  porch  being  part 
of  the  original  temple  which  escaped  destruction  by 
Nebuchadnezzar. 

Scene  interesting  because  it  discloses  the  straggle  in 
the  minds  of  the  Pharisees.  "  How  long  dost  thou  make 
us  to  doubt?  If  thou  be  the  Christ  tell  us  plainly." 
(John  10:  24.)  Request  not  unreasonable  for  Christ  had 
all  along  claimed  the  office,  and  cfeclaimed  the  title. 
Two  views  in  regard  to  the  spirit  of  the  question  : 

I.  That  it  was  insidious  and  dishonest,  intended  to 
draw  out  a  definite  claim  of  Messiahship  so  that  they 
could  have  something  definite  on  which  to  base  their 
charges. 

II.  That  it  was  honest  and  fair.  Christ  had  never  told 
them  positively  that  he  was  the  Messiah,  and  now  when 
challenged  he  still  does  not  answer  directly,  because  of 
their  misconceptions.  According  to  their  understanding 
of  the  term  he  was  not  the  Messiah.  But  he  affirms  his 
Messiahship  to  them  in  three  ways :  1.  He  had  told 
them  before,  and  they  did  not  believe  him.  2.  By  refer- 
ring to  the  works  he  had  wrought.  3.  His  gift  to  his 
sheep  is  eternal  life,  and  he  is  the  Son  of  God,  one  with 
the  Father.  This  enraged  the  Jews  and  they  took  up 
stones  to  stone  him.  "  But,"  says  Farrar,  "  his  undis- 
turbed majest}'  disarmed  them  with  a  word."  "  Many 
good  deeds  did  I  show  you  from  my  Father  ;  for  which 
of  these  do  you  mean  to  stone  me  ?"  He  then  quoted 
the  82nd  Psalm,  where  judges  are  called  gods.  But  he 
executes  a  higher  office.  This  seems  to  ascribe  his  Son- 
ship  not  to  his  nature,  but  to  his  being  sent  by  the  Father. 

Ans. :  1.  The  terms  used  imply  his  ^^re-existence.  2. 
Even  if  he  does  here  advance  only  the  lowest  claim  to 
the  title,  "  Son  of  God,"  it  is  no  proof  that  he  does  not 
elsewhere  use  it  in  highest  sense.  No  one  besides  Christ 
ever  says,  "I  and  my  Father  are  one." 


124 

Then  they  attempt  to  seize  him, but  Farrar  says  "they 
conld  not.  His  presence  overawed  them.  They  could 
only  make  a  passage  foi-  him,  and  glare  their  hatred  upon 
him  as  he  passed  from  among  them." 

Because  of  the  opposition  Christ  goes  to  Bethany  in 
Perea,  where  John  had  been  baptizing.  The  latter  is 
meiitioned  because  a  witness  for  Christ.  How  long  he 
staid  there  is  not  known,  but  St.  John  tells  us  that  many 
resorted  to  him  and  believed  on  him,  being  convinced  of 
the  truth  of  John  Bap.'s  testimony.  (John  10  :  41-42.) 
(The  sections  from  95  to  101  were  passed  over.) 

§§92,  93.  Raising  of  Lazarus.  Counsel  of  Caiapkas.  A 
message  comes  to  Christ  in  Perea  from  the  sisters  of 
Lazarus,  stating  that  their  brother  is  sick.  After  two 
days  Christ  came  to  Bethany  and  found  that  Lazarus  had 
been  buried  four  daN's  (John  11.) 

Theories  explaining  the  time  :  a.  Lazarus  died  on  the 
day  when  the  message  was  sent.  Christ  delayed  two 
days,  and  then  went  to  Bethany  occupying  one  day  with 
the  journey. 

h.  Christ  received  the  message  that  Lazarus  was  sick, 
waited  two  days  for  his  death,  and  occupied  four  days 
with  the  journey.  Farrar  takes  the  former  view,  mainl}- 
on  the  ground  that  Bethau}-  in  Perea,  where  Christ  was, 
is  only  about  2D  miles  from  the  Bethany  near  Jerus., 
where  Lazarus  lived.  He  also  infers  that  the  family  of 
Lazarus  was  one  of  wealth  and  position  from  its  proximity 
to  Jerus.  and  from  the  concourse  of  Jews  who  had  come 
to  sympathize  with  the  bereaved  sisters.  (Farrar,  chap. 
47.) 

Opposition  among  the  Jeivs  :  This  is  again  referred  to  in 
the  remonstrance  of  the  Disciples  against  Christ's  going 
up  to  Jerus.  lest  he  should  be  killed.  Thomas  says: 
"  Let  us  also  go  that  we  nuiy  die  with  him."  (John  11 : 
16.)     Christ  goes  up  voluntarily  to  sacrifice  himself. 

Design  of  the  Miracle:  To  understand  it  aright,  recall 
design  of  period — to  give  the  people  final  opportunity  of 
accepting  him  as  Messiah.  On  the  other  hand,  the  peo- 
ple hesitated  to  come  to  a  decision  because  the  action  of 
the  rulers  was  uncertain.  Christ's  oVjject  was  to  secure  a 
decision  of  the  people,  for  or  against  him.  Hence  the 
prayer  at  the  grave  of  Lazarus, — "  because  of  the  people 
which    stood    by."     (John    11  :  42.)     This   culminating 


{_y  i^.    '  V 


OJ^MJy- 


^^^  ^^A^^AJ    djviouu&A.  -fyrr  /bUX^L^^-v^^  (j)  jLC/i   <)-u>iaJ 


(^Irj  /^M.A^u'  (y^^-M^  '<-<-XMb  o-<Ut^'^^L^m^(y  OV\J   'tXju't/tKx^.v.oijL^ 


■y^CL-^sJU^  *      ^iuA  ^/^^ch-^     ^tx---2?L^    AyU-iU'^      jijU  ^Jh-y^-^^JL^  ^    ^i^^^tof.   > 

^iU>  A>y--c<^A-  jg^^^AJLc^-^^^-^.jz.A.     lW    ijl^^j^MX'  t^   v-vi_fia>o<^  ^?ZlI7t>f^  yv^^"-/-*^  yt^-tf 
^-t^d,^^-*^J>..^^sMA^'f'C>^cJ^J^''^    c<^   -l^-Jfy6l.,^tJ>,   .  >4>o^XA^     <-<v-tL>TjL.    iUproJ-d. 

-"^-^-^  'T'^^^^-r^  IrfyLie^-tn  .     /^  (1,cl£I^  a.cy^-^^-»^   4t<?^    ;^?-^/v£  r^  ,^^-mXo  , 


-  r^Z^   ^  :— -o.-^    7^:-^  ^^  /w.^.^./ 

^  a<.:cz.L^j^^  <^^^  etc.  /locA^  /)  ^:g2  fjuAAsu  ^^ 


125 

event  is,  therefore,  reserved  until  near  the  close  of  Christ's 
ministry,  and  for  the  neio'hborhood  of  Jerusalem.  The 
proof  that  the  Father  had  sent  him  is  thus  given  in  the 
presence  of  the  rulers.  Still,  there  is  a  contrast  between 
the  openness  of  his  private  teaching,  e.  g.,  to  Martha 
when  he  says,  "  I  am  the  resurrection  and  the  life,"  and 
his  public  teaching  when  he  says,  "  that  they  may  believe 
that  thou  hast  sent  me." 

Effect  of  the  Miracle  :  Verj'  profound.  Man}'  believed, 
and  others  ran  with  excitement  to  tell  the  rulers.  (John 
11 :  45-46.)  This  was  the  last  link  in  the  chain  of  events 
which  led  to  the  malicious  decision  of  the  Sanhedrim. 
Farrar :  "  They  eo<</(/ not  den}^  the  miracle;  t\\Qy  would 
not  believe  on  him  who  had  performed  it;  the\' could 
oidy  dread  his  growing  intluence,  and  conjecture  that  it 
would  be  used  to  make  himself  a  king,  and  so  end  in 
Roman  intervention  and  the  annihilation  of  their  politi- 
cal existence." 

Why  should  the  people's  faith  in  Christ  produce  such 
a  result?  Two  ans.  :  1.  Some  say  this  was  a  mere  [ire- 
tense  by  the  Pharisees.  2.  True  view  is  that  Pharisees 
recognized  real  result  of  Christ's  claims.  If  the  spiritual 
view  of  Christ's  kingdom  were  now  to  prevail  with  the 
people  all  hope  of  political  deliverance  and  independence 
would  be  lost,  as  well  as  their  present  sources  of  liveli- 
liood.  Being  engaged  in  a  bitter  struggle  for  mitional 
independence,  they  were  convin<!ed  by  the  address  of  the 
High  Priest  that  it  was  better  for  one  man  to  perish 
rather  than  that  the  whole  nation  should  perish  (John 
11 :  50-51.)  They  would  not  even  stop  to  inquire  whether 
this  one  person  were  innocent  or  guilty,  says  Farrar. 
Still,  though  seltish  and  Pharisaic,  their  reasons  contained 
elements  of  power.  "Then  from  that  day  forth  they  took 
counsel  together  for  to  put  him  to  death,"  although  this 
was  not  the  first  time  the  Pharisees,  as  a  party,  had  so 
determined.  Vide  John  5  :  16-18.  At  Tabernacles 
Jesus  accused  them  of  this  design.     John  7:  19. 

Advice  of  Caiaphas  :  John  remarks  that  the  words  of 
Caiaphas  were  not  his  own,  but  a  prophecy  of  the 
Atonement,  he  "  being  the  High  Priest  that  same  year." 
(Vide  suggestive  note  by  Farrar  on  the  expression  "  that 
same  year."  Vol.  H.,  p.  174.)  Common  view  is  that 
the  prophecy  was  involuntary  on  part  of  Caiaphas.     But 


126 

what  he  meant  in   a   low  sense,  Grod   meant   in   a   high 
sense. 

ObJediQHS  to  the  lliracle  :  Sceptics  flourish  here,  Spin- 
oza siur^ilf  he  could  have  believed  that  miracle  he  would 
h^ve  become  a  Christian  and  broken  in  pieces  his  own 
philosophical  system. 

1.  It  is  said  the  Disci})les  misunderstood  Jesus  when 
he  said,  "  Our  friend  Lazarus  sleepeth,"  and  that  Martha 
misunderstood  him  when  he  said,  "  Thy  brother  shall 
rise  again,"  which  would  not  have  been  the  case  if  he 
had  been  in  the  habit  of  workins^  miracles. 

2.  It  is  alleged  that  the  Jews  would  not  have  referred 
to  an  inferior  miracle — opening  the  eyes  of  the  blind — if 
Christ  had  power  to  raise  the  dead. 

Ans  :  The  Jews  refer  to  the  blind  man's  case  because 
it  was  of  recent  occurrence,  aiid  had  made  a  deep  im- 
pression. The  other  cases  of  resurrection  had  taken 
place  in  Gal.,  and  could  have  been  known  to  the  Jews 
near  Jerus.,  onl}-  by  report. 

3.  It  is  alleged  that  we  cannot  consistently  believe 
that  Christ  would  wait  two  days  after  receiving  the  mes- 
sage that  Lazarus  was  sick.  If  Lazarus  was  not  dead,  it 
was  aniel  in  him  to  tarry  ;  if  he  was  dead,  it  was  mere 
ostentation  to  delay. 

Ans:  If  there  was  any  delay,  which  some  deny,  its 
object  was  to  exercise  the  faith  of  the  sisters  and  the  Dis- 
ciples. Besides,  it  is  possible  that  he  had  an  important 
work  to  finish  in  Perea. 

4.  The  prayer  at  the  grave  is  objected  to.  It  is  said  to 
be  out  of  analogy  witli  his  other  miracles.  Strauss  does 
not  hesitate  to  call  it  a  "  sham  prayer,"  oifered  for  the 
sake  of  appearance,  in  reference  to  those  that  stood  by. 

Ans  :  Christ  did  not  pray  on  other  occasions,  because 
he  desired  to  give  evidence  of  his  own  power  and  divinity. 
Here  he  prays  to  show  his  relation  to»the  Father,  appeal- 
ing to  God  in  the  sight  of  the  Jews. 

5.  Another  objection  is  found  in  the  silence  of  the 
Synoptists  concerning  a  family  made  so  prominent  by 
John.  Luke  mention  Martha  and  Mary  but  neither 
Lazarus  nor  Bethany. 

6.  The  Synoptists  silent  about  the  miracle,  which  was 
the  most  important  of  all. 

Answer:  a.  Lazarus  and  his  family  w^ere  specially 
obnoxious  to  the  Jews  because  of  their  intimacy  with 


(^/  -^^^LATv^^   05  ^    ^o,^^-™,    *^  ..e^p^    /?  ^f^H^^ 


qJ^     X^      '>Vv_Ct^c£€.    d'        OU.^       0'^<l^OCy<^A^4y    oi/Ct^OAAA^ 


"^'KJL 


f        c/'^di^  -^  ■^.■^^.^i^<-,..aJLj    A.Aj-~ec^    flKW^.<Jr^6c^o-^>od     ^  hJL&^ji 


127 

Jesiis,  and  especially  because  Lazarus  was  a  living  wit- 
ness of  his  power  to  raise  the  dead.  Hence  there  is  a 
convincing  argument  in  the  fact  that  the  Syn.,  writing 
tirst,  forbore  to  make  this  family  prominent  lest  the}' 
should  sufter  persecution.  This  obstacle,  however,  no 
longer  existed  when  John  wrote.  But  it  may  be  added 
danger  to  themselves  seems  never  to  have  influenced  the 
Evangelists  to  hide  any  of  the  facts  of  Christ's  life. 

b.  But  a  better  answer  is  found  in  the  settled  plan  of 
the  Syn.  not  to  relate  any  events  oecuring  at  Jerus.  until 
the  closing  week  of  Christ's  life.  They  confine  them- 
selves mainly  to  Gal.  Min.  Each  tells  the  things  most 
directly  within  his  own  scope.  Hence  Farrar  :  "  Now 
since  raising  of  Lazarus  was  no  greater  evidence,  to  them, 
of  miraculous  power  than  those  which  they  recorded, 
and  since  it  fell  within  the  Judean  cycle,  the  omission  of 
the  miracle  is  no  more  inexplicable  than  the  omission  of 
the  miracle  of  Bethesda  (John  5,)  or  the  healing  of  the 
man  born  blind,  (John  9.")     Farrar,  chap.  47. 

It  is  further  objected  that  we  cannot  accept  the  Syn.'s 
account  of  the  sudden  burst  of  applause  with  which 
Jesus  was  received  in  Judea  after  the  Gal.  Min.  :  Mt.  19  : 
1,  2.  But  notice  that  it  is  Feast-time  when  he  reaches 
Jerus.,  and  multitudes  from  Gal.  are  ah-eady  there. 

Naturalistic  Theory  of  the  Miracle  :  1.  Not  actual  natu- 
ral death.  Only  a  case  of  trance.  "  He  is  not  dead  but 
sleepeth"  is  to  be  taken  literally.  Renan  claims  there 
was  actual  collusion  between  Christ  and  the  sisters.  2. 
The  miracle  grows  out  of  a  misunderstanding  of  the  con- 
versation with  Martha  about  the  resurrection. 

Mifthical  Theory :  Strauss  held  this  theory  at  first,  but 
he  at  last  adopted  the  Tubingen  view  mairdy.  He  says 
raising  of  Lazarus  is  a  fiction  based  on  one  of  Luke's 
parables.  Baur  and  others  say  it  is  a  creation  of  the  2nd 
century,  and  its  germ  was  the  expression,  "I  am  the 
resurrection."  But  all  these  theories  illustrate  the 
credulity  of  unbelief,  since  any  one  of  these  views  is 
harder  to  support  than  the  plain  Gospel  narrative.  (Vide 
Ebrard,  pp.  351-358.) 

Christ  retires  to  JEphraim.  On  account  of  the  action  of 
the  Sanhedrim  (John  11 :  47-54)  Christ  retires  to  the 
city  of  Ephraim,  to  delay  the  execution  of  the  decree 
until  his  time  should  come.     Where  is  Ephraim  ?   Some 


128 

say  east  of  the  Jordan.  More  likely  near  Jerusalem. 
Some  identify  it  with  the  Ephraim  in  2  Chron.  13 :  19, 
near  to  Bethel,  or  twenty  miles  north  of  Jerusalem. 
Josephus  speaks  of  a  cavalry  expedition  ot  Vespasian 
by  way  of  Ephraim  to  Bethel.  (Vide  Robinson's  Greek 
Har.  pp.  203-4;  Farrar,  Vol.  IL,  p.  176.)  Intervening 
sections  not  touched  upon.  Vide  small  syllabus,  p.  14. 
/| — ^  §107.    Third  Prediction  of  Christ's  Death.     This  predic- 

tion more  specific  than  in  74th  or  77th  section.  Judicial 
death  now  predicted,  to  be  accomplished  by  the  help  of 
the  Gentiles,  (Mt.  20;  Mk.  10;  Lk.  18.)  He  foretells 
the  manner  of  his  death,  viz.,  by  crucifixion,  and  predicts 
that  he  shall  rise  on  the  third  day.  He  tells  this  to  the 
Twelve  alone.  Mark  notes  the  fear  of  the  Disciples, 
chap.  10 :  32,  from  which  it  may  be  inferred  there  was 
something  supernatural  in  Christ's  appearance. 

PASSIOIs^   WEEK. 

Natural  Divisions :  1.  From  the  arrival  in  Bethany  to 
the  Passover  Supper — six  days.  2.  From  the  Supper  to 
the  Crucifixion.  3.  From  the  Resurrection  to  the  Ascen- 
sion. Recorded  in  Mt.  2i-28  chajjs  ;  Mk.  11-16;  Lk. 
19-24;  John  12-21.  Space  given  by  each  Evangelist; 
Mt.  little  more  than  one  third  ;  Mk.  little  less  than  one- 
third  ;  Luke  one-fourth;  John  nearly  one  half.  In  many 
cases  three,  in  some  four  parallel  accounts. 

Characteristics  of  the  Period :  I.  A  period  of  voluntary 
sacrifice.  Christ's  hour  is  now  at  hand,  and  he  submits 
voluntarily  to  be  condemned  and  executed  by  his  ene- 
mies. Seeks  the  most  public  places.  Takes  possession 
of  the  Temple,  and  for  three  days  holds  his  foes  at  bay. 
All  their  former  plots  to  take  him  had  failed.  But  now, 
by  an  event  accidental  on  their  part,  but  designed  on 
his,  they  are  enabled  to  seize  him,  and  he  without  resist- 
ance gives  himself  up  to  them.  His  death,  therefore, 
voluntary,  and  hence  sacrificial — a  sacrifice  for  sin.  No 
other  theory  can  explain  the  facts. 

II.  It  is  a  period  in  which  Christ  prominently  asserts 
his  claims  to  the  title  of  Messiah.  This  he  does  in  three 
ways  :  a.  Typically  by  securing  the  Hosannas  of  the 
multitude  as  he  enters  Jerus.  h.  Publicly  during  his 
trial,     c.  By  his  teaching. 


i^^^W       JtL'CUe^\^i.yl..y^     Z*?"^     J^^^-T-L-^Vnj 


129 

III.  Tlie  Teacliing  is  siippleineiital  and  appropriate  to 
the   period.     In   all   Christ's  teacliing  there  is  a  marked  ^ 

advance.  We  have  here  three  kinds  of  teaching  :  a.  ^  V'-'-'a^-^ 
The  h^st  of  the  three  groups  of  Parahles.  1.  Concern-  ^lJ|;>-^-'^ 
ing  "Kingdom  of  Heaven;"  2.  The  way  of  salvation  ; 
3.  The  Judgment,  b.  Final  discourses  against  Phari- 
sees, c.  Consolator}'  instruction  to  Disciples.  In  Mt. 
these  instructions  largely  pxojdl£tifi ;  in  John  both  pro- 
phetic and  consolatory.  Explains  to  them  that  he  must 
go  away  in  order  tliat  the  Comforter  maj  come. 

Order  of  Eveids.  The  Evangelists  governed  by  same 
plan.  The  order  is  alike  in  all  four  except  in  two  instan- 
ces :  a.  John  makes  the  Supper  at  Bethany  the  first 
event  of  the  week,  while  Syn.  place  it  on  the  eve  of  the 
third  day.  h.  They  differ  as  to  the  time  of  cursing  the 
barren  fig  tree.  In  their  plan,  Mt.  refers  to  prophecy, 
Mk.  to  details,  by  days,  and  Lk.  is  supplementary.  Rul- 
ing idea  is  contrast  between  Christ's  personal  dignity  and 
gentleness  and  his  cruel  treatment  by  the  priests,  rulers 
and  people. 

Succession  of  daj/s.  This  is  obtained  from  Mk,  by  count- 
ing back  from  the  Passover  Supper  five  days;  and  also 
from  Jolin  12:  1.  "Then  Jesus  six  daj-s  before  the  Pass- 
over came  to  Bethany."  John's  peculiar  idiom  means, 
literally  six  days.  Notice  we  have  in  John  a  iceek  both 
at  the  beginning  and  end  of  Christ's  ministry.  Mode  of 
counting  days  involves  two  questions  :  a.  Shall  we  count 
in  both  extremes?  b.  Was  14th  Nisan,  Tliursday  or 
Friday?  Did  the  Supper  come  on  the  day  of  the  feast, 
or  on  the  evening  before?  The  day  of  Crucifixion,  we 
have  seen  in  the  opening  lectures  on  Chronology,  was 
Friday,  15th  Nisan.  The  Supper  was  the  regular  Paschal 
meal  eaten  on  Thursday  the  14th, 

Theories:  1,  Wies.,  Lich,,  Andrews  count  back  six 
days  from  Thursday  the  14th,  excluding  the  latter  which 
brings  us  to  Friday,  the  8th,  as  the  day  of  arrival  in 
Bethany.  2,  Lange  includes  Thursday  which  gives  the 
9th,  or  the  Jewish  Sabbath  as  the  day  of  Christ's  arrival. 
Lange  supposes  that  Christ  halted  on  Friday  a  Sabbath- 
day's  journey  from  Jerus.  3,  Those  who  follow  Bleek's 
arrangement,  as  Tisch,,  Ell.,  Alford  and  Schaff,  make 
Friday  the  14th  Nisan,  But  as  they  count  backward  six 
days  excluding  Friday  the  days  of  the  week  remain  un- 


130 

altered.  4.  Robinson  holds  Friday  to  have  been  the  first 
day  of  the  feast.  Six  days  before  would  make  the  arrival 
in  Bethany  on  Sunday,  and  he  supposes  the  Jewish  Sab- 
bath to  have  been  spent  in  Jericho. 

Objections  to  Robinson  :  a.  He  begins  a  day  later 
than  any  other  Harmonist  and  compresses  the  4th  and 
5th  days  into  one.  (Mk.  14:  1.)  h.  The  feast  did  not 
begin  on  the  15th.  (Levit.  23 :  5.)  c.  It  is  contrary  to 
tradition  which  makes  Palm  Sunday  the  commemorative 
day  of  Christ's  entrance  into  Jerus.  Robinson  makes 
the  entrance  on  Monday,  d.  His  own  earlier  editions 
take  the  other  view.  Farrar  :  "  Thither  (the  loved  home 
at  Bethany)  he  arrived  on  the  evening  of  Friday,  Nisan 
8,  A.  U.  C.  870  (March  31,  A.  D.  30,)  six  days  before  the 
Passover,  and  before  the  sunset  had  commenced  the  Sab- 
bath hours."  Vol.  n.  p.  188.  Vide  Andrews,  pp.  396- 
7-8. 

§§111,131.  Supper  atBethamj.  John  places  this  on  the 
evening  before  the  public  entrance  into  Jerus.  The 
Synoptists  place  it  on  the  eve  of  Tuesday,  or  two  days 
before  the  Passover  (Mt.  26  :  2.)  This  difference  alleged 
to  be  irreconcilable. 

Ans :  Neither  John  nor  the  Syn.  date  the  Supper 
positively.  The  six  days  of  John  do  not  date  the  Supper 
but  the  arrival  in  Bethany  ;  and  the  two  days  of  Mt.  and 
Mk.  do  not  date  the  Supper  but  the  betrayal  of  Judas. 
Farrar  :  "  It  is  only  in  appearance  that  the  Syn.  seem 
to  place  this  feast  two  days  before  the  Passover.  They 
narrate  it  there  to  account  for  the  treachery  of  Judas, 
which  was  consummated  by  his  final  arrangements  with 
the  Sanhedrim  on  the  Wednesday  of  Holy  week ;  but  we 
see  from  St.  John  that  this  latter  must  have  been  hit* 
second  interview  with  them — at  the  first  interview  all.  de- 
tails had  been  left  indefinite."  (Farrar,  Vol.  II.,  p.  188, 
Note.) 

Robinson  follows  order  of  Syn.  These  are  his  rea- 
sons :  1.  The  offence  taken  by  Judas  at  this  feast  was 
the  occasion  of  his  treason.  Rulers  had  resolved  to  de- 
lay arrest.  But  Judas'  proposal  on  Tuesday,  (Supper  on 
Tuesday  eve.)  gave  them  an  unexpected  opportunity. 
Ans  :  It  does  not  appear  that  Judas  went  immediately  to 
the  priests. 

2.  The  rore  of  Mt. — "then  Judas  went  out."  Ans: 
But  TOTS  is  not  always  used  by  Mt.  in  reference  to  time. 


Xcr&'iC    -<A^     ^Vv^^^|»   -^  ]       L-.^     I^^^^^^^A— ^L.^-^^ 


TOT^ 


i^^^^X^  ~€L^  ltc_  ,^^^         ^ 


181 

He  often  makes  it  connect  passages  which  are  not  suc- 
cessive. 

3.  John  transposes  events  in  order  to  complete  ac- 
count of  occurrences  at  Bethany. 

Arguments  in  favor  John's  order  :  1.  John  more  com- 
plete. 2.  Trj  irzaupcou  (John  12  :  12) — "  the  next  day  " — 
was  the  day  of  puhlic  entrance.  Best  exegesis  favors 
John's  order.  3.  Whole  passage  in  Mt.  and  Mk.  seems 
to  be  parenthetical.  Balance  of  probability  in  favor  of 
John's  order.  According  to  latter  Christ  arrived  in 
Bethany  on  Friday.  His  friends  make  him  a  feast, 
as  had  been  done  when  he  left  Capernaum  and 
Perea.  He  did  not  decline  this  mode  of  being  honored. 
Sisters  of  Lazarus  improve  the  occasion  to  display  their 
gratitude,  and  Jesus  makes  reference  to  his  approaching 
death. 

Popular  Excitement.  In  Jolin  11  :  55-57,  we  read  that 
many  went  from  the  country  to  Jerus.  to  the  Passover. 
The  great  theme  of  conversation  among  the  rulers  was 
Christ.  "  What  think  ye,  that  he  will  not  come  to  the 
feast  ?"  They  expected  negative  answer.  He  had  not 
come  to  previous  feast.  From  John  11  :  57  we  learn 
that  the  Sanhedrim  had  made  public  charges  against 
Christ,  and  were  waiting  to  take  him.  But  their  doubts 
are  soon  solved  by  the  public  arrival  of  Jesus,  which  in- 
creased the  excitement.  Multitudes  flocked  out  of  the 
city  to  meet  him. 

Place  of  the  Supper  :  It  is  urged  that  it  must  have 
been  in  the  house  of  Martha  and  Mary  because  they  were 
present  and  "  Martha  served,"  which  is  supposed  to  con- 
tradict Mt.  and  Mk.  who  say  it  was  in  the  house  of 
y^  Sunon  the  leper.  But,  as  Ebrard  suggests,  why  could 
not  Martha  insist  upon  "  serving  "  in  the  house  of  the 
host  with  whom  her  family  were  intimate  ?  Some  say- 
that  Simon  was  the  father  of  Lazarus;  others  that  he 
was  the  husband  of  Martha.  Or  he  may  have  been  the 
owner  of  the  house  in  which  Martha  and  Mary  lived. 

Mode  of  Anointing  :  John  says  the  feet  ;  Mt.  and  Mk. 
the  head.  Ebrard,  in  reply  to  objectors,  inquires,  Why 
not  both?  Then  according  to  John,  it  was  Judas  who 
objected  to  the  waste;  according  to  Mt.  it  was  "  his  dis- 
ciples." Ans  :  Where  is  it  denied  by  John  that  none  of 
the  disciples  but  Judas  objected  ?  John  mentions  Judas 
in  order  to  give  the  motive  for  his  objection. 


^^  b 


Another  objection  is  founded  upon  the  resemblance 
between  this  anointing  and  the  one  in  Lk.  8:  36.  Light- 
ibot :  Three  anointings :  one  in  John,  one  in  Mt.  and 
Mk.  and  one  in  Lk.  He  denies  any  contradiction. 
Strauss  claims  that  the  whole  record  has  to  do  with  only 
one  case  of  anointing.  Ebrard  answers  Strauss  by  say- 
ing that  the  onl}- resemblance  between  present  anointing 
and  that  in  Lk.  7.'  30  is  that  the  name  in  both  cases  is 
Simon  and  the  feet  of  Je-sas  are  wiped  with  the  hair.  But  one 
Simon  was  a  Pharisee,  the  other  a  quiet  follower  of 
Jesus.  Ebrard  also  suggests  that  there  was  probably 
more  than  one  Simon  in  Palestine,  and  that  it  was  not 
impossible  that  the  circumstance  of  wiping  the  feet 
should  be  repeated.     (Ebrard,  pp.  366-369^) 

Lessons  taught.  L  The  offering  was  valuable  in  itself — 
"  very  precious."  Tliis  may  apply  both  to  tlie  box  and 
the  contents.  2.  The  quantity  was  large — worth  about 
fifty  dollars.  Farrar  from  this  infers  that  the  family  was 
rich.  Judas  is  indignant  at  the  waste,  but  Jesus  defends 
Mary's  act,  and  declares  that  it  shall  be  a  momorial  of 
her  throughout  the  world.  The  inference  is  that  the 
expression  of  a  loft}-  religions  sentiment  justifies  great 
expenditure,  provided  it  is  subordinate  to  deeds  of  charity 
to  our  neighbor. 

Other  suggestions  :  a.  Character  of  the  sisters  always 
the  same.  Martha  "server;"  Mary  sits  at  Jesus"  feet. 
b.  Meaning  of  "this  Gospeh"  Meyer  says  the  reference 
is  t(^  his  death  of  which  he  had  first  spoken.  The  wide 
preaching  of  tlie  Gospel  is  also  referred  to,  Alford  says 
it  is  the  prediction  of  a  future  written  Gospel.  Notice 
how  literally  the  prediction  concerning  Mary  has  been 
fulfilled.  The  rebuke  stimulated  the  malice  of  Judas 
until  he  became  a  traitor. 

§112.  Public  Entrance  into  J evus.  1.  Ti^ne  :  It  was  on 
Sunda}',  10th  INisan.  Bleek  says  Sunday,  and  Robin- 
son, Monda}-.  That  it  was  a  day  after  a  night  in  Beth- 
any appears  from  John  12:  12.  Meaning  of  the  event: 
He  rode  upon  a  carpet  of  branches  and  garments.  It 
was  a  public  acknowledgment  of  liis  kingly  claims  as  the 
Messiah.  His  hour  had  come.  Hence  the  contrast  with 
his  previous  conduct  is  very  noticeable.  Important  that 
the  people  should  be  impressed  as  well  as  the  Disciples. 
Appropriate  that  his  last  public  act  should  be  the  clearest 
proof  of  his  Messiahship. 


A 


^^-^dxt-'O^ 


H-t^^jelj^ 


CV-u-oL 


133 

Significcaice  of  date.  His  entrance  on  the  lOtli  of  the 
month  is  ciirectlj'  associated  with  the  Law  in  Exodus  12: 
3.  It  was  the  day  when  the  Paschal  lamb  was  set  apart. 
So  the  Lamb  of  God  sets  his  willing  seal  to  his  own  con- 
secration as  the  sacrifice  for  sin,  Siimbolical  acts:  a. 
Riding  on  an  ass's  colt.  This  was  fulfillment  of  the 
prophecy  in  Zech.  9:9.  h.  It  was  specially  significant 
of  his  kingship.  Not  on  a  war-horse,  but  on  an  ass  sig- 
nificant of  peace  in  Oriental  countries.  The  animal,  too, 
was  a  colt  "whereon  never  man  sat."  Like  the  alabaster 
box  unprofaned  by  other  use.  c.  Strewing  branches  and 
garments  also  significant  of  royalty,  d.  The  people  also 
bore  palm-branches  in  their  hands,  as  emblems  of  victor}-. 

Sudden  Erdlnisiasm  of  the  People.  This  was  occasioned 
by  his  acceptance  of  their  homage.  Always  ready  to 
su])port  hira  when  the  result  seemed  likely  to  be  their 
restoration  to  temporal  and  political  superiority.  The 
multitudes  quoted  Ps.  118.^  This  originally  composed  at 
the  restoration  of  the  Temple,  and  now  applied  to  the 
Messiah  by  tlie  people,  sliowing  that  they  regarded  Jesus 
as  one  whom  they  had  looked  for.  "Hosanna  to  the  Son 
of  David."  Jesus  had  never  before  allowed  the  public 
ascription  of  Messiahship,  because  it  would  rouse  opposi- 
tion before  his  work  was  completed.  But  now  his  work 
was  done.  The  Pharisees,  feeling  scandalized,  said  unto 
him:  "  Master,  rebuke  thy  Disciples."  Jesus  answered 
that  "if  these  should  hold  their  peace,  tlie  stones  would 
immediately  cry  out,"  i.  e.,  to  silence  the  people  would 
be  to  suppress  eternal  truth.  Robinson  introduces  the 
Hosannas  of  the  children,  the  day  after  the  feast  at  Beth- 
any, in  this  place.  But  most  Harmonists  follow  Mt's 
order,  and  introduce  this  after  cursing  of  fig-tree. 
Prophecies  fulfilled  :  Isa.  62  :  11  with  Zech.  9:9;  also 
Gen.  49:  10,  11. 

Lamentation  over  Jerus.  This  scene  is  preserved  by  Lk. 
and  connected  directly  with  public  entrance.  While 
they  are  hailing  him  as  king,  he  foresees  the  sad  fate  of 
the  city.  Judicial  blindness  had  seized  the  rulers  and 
the  people.  He  sees  that  the  majority  will  rebel  against 
him  and  aid  in  putting  him  to  death  ;  that'  the  enemies 
of  the  Jews  will  dig  a  trench  about  Jerus.,  and  not  leave 
one  stone  upon  another.  (Lk.  19  :  43,44.)  This  proph- 
ecy was  literally  fulfilled,  for  the   Roman   array  was   en- 


t^- 


134 

cauipeJ  on  the  veiy  spot  where  this  prediction  was 
uttered. 

The  Pharisees  were  ready  to  give  up  in  despair  when 
they  saw  Christ's  popnharitj.  Effect  on  the  people  :  The 
whole  city  was  moved — kaeia&rj,  i.  e.,  shaken.  Christ  thus 
had  an  opportunity  to  finish  his  work,  for  his  enemies 
)io  less  than  his  friends  were  involved  in  the  excitement. 
Road  by  ID  Inch  he  entered :  Mount  of  Olives  not  a  single 
hill,  but  a  ridge  with  three  summits.  Three  roads  cross 
it.  The  northern  one  is  steep  ;  the  second  is  half  way 
down  the  mountain  ;  and  the  third,  which  Christ  proba- 
bly took,  and  "  which  sweeps  round  the  southern 
shoulder  of  the  central  mass,"  is  the  main  road  for  all 
kinds  of  travel.  On  this  road  there  is  a  projecting  mass 
of  rock  around  which  the  road  suddenl}-  turns  to  the 
north,  and  then  the  whole  city  bursts  suddenly  upon  the 
vision.  This  angle  has  been  fixed  upon  as  the  place 
where  Jesus  stood  as  he  we[)t  over  the  city. 

Location,  of  [daces;  Bethany  signifying  House  of 
Dates,  is  from  1|  to  2  miles  S.  E.  of  Jerus  Its  modern 
name  is  Lazarieh,  which  thus  continues  to  bear  witness 
to  the  great  miracle  wrought  there.  Now  a  small  village 
of  some  twenty  houses,  occupied  by  Bedouin  Arab.s. 
Bethphage  House  of  Unripe  Figs,  according  to  Lightfoot 
was  a  suburb  of  Jerus.,  though  hardly  any  two  opinions 
agree.     (Andrews,  pp.  404-5.) 

Objections  :  1.  The  Syn.  introduce  the  iiarrative  as 
though  the  last  journey  were  continuous.  John  says 
that  Jesus  passed  the  night  at  Bethany  and  the  "  next 
day  "  went  to  Jerus.  Ans  :  John  gives  the  natural  order 
of  events  while  the  Syn.  records  simpl}'  the  connection 
of  events.  Ebrard  denies  that  it  is  any  where  stated  that 
Jesus  went  to  Jerus.  the  same  day  he  left  Jericho,  as 
Strauss  assumes  in  order  to  prove  an  alleged  contradic- 
tion. 2.  If  Jesus  started  from  Bethany  as  John  says, 
then  he  could  not  have  sent  there  for  the  animals.  Ans  : 
Who  says  lie  did  send  tliere  tor  the  animals?  The  "  vil- 
lage "  referred  to  by  Mt.  and  Mk.  refers  not  to  one  of 
those  named,  but  to  another  on  the  way  to  Jerus.  And, 
as  Ebrard  suggests,  why  could  he  not  send  forward  for 
the  colt  after  he  had  gone  some  distance  from  Bethany  ? 
(Vide  Ebrard,  pp.  371-2  on  the  expression  "  drew  nigh.") 

3.  Mode  of  obtaining  the  animals  supposes  a  mj-thical 
origin  for  the  narrative.     Ans:  The  objection  is  trifling. 


0 


J^.-yTiM  'W^-ilX^ 


laJr,  f^o^'i^^^-^^JU-     ttuu   ,^a^  cJ)  ^-idu.  .^^^::ZJL  'z-uVh 


j^.^.^  ^-^.^^X  ""^^    ^    ^^^-^^^^  ^^-^^^-^     Q^tX^    \Z    '\f-r.O^ 


135 

The  method  chosen  is  in  thlfinment  of  prophecy.  Some 
suppose  the  owner  of  the  animals  believed  in  the  Lord  : 
others,  that  a  pre-arran<reinent  had  been  made  with  him. 

4.  It  is  said  that  Mt.  (21  :  7)  represents  Jesus  as  riding 
on  both  animals.  Ans  :  A  similar  expression  is  used  in 
Acts  23:  24.  But  nobody  infers  that  Paul  rode  several 
animals  at  once.  (Ebrard,  p.  372.)  Christ's  entrance  is 
alleged  to  have  been  an  attempt  to  excite  revolution. 
This  is  an  old  charge.  It  is  refuted  by  the  fact  that  after 
the  triumphal  entrance  he  immediately  withdraws  to 
Bethany,  thereby  as  some  suppose,  signifying  that  he 
left  Jerus.  to  its  fate. 

§113.  Cursing  the  Fiq-tree ;  Cleansiiifi  the  Temple.  Bleek 
puts  these  events  on  Sunday,  10th  Nisan  ;  Wies.  on  the 
11th  and  Rob.  on  the  12th.  Ditterence  between  Mt.  and 
Mk.  very  slight.  Mt.  puts  the  events  in  their  natural 
connection,  without  noticing  the  division  of  time.  Puts 
cleansing  of  Temple  immediately  after  entrance,  and 
cursing  of  Fig-tree  next  morning.  (Mt.  21:  17-18.) 
This  tree  often  planted  by  the  way-side  for  its  shade  and 
because  "the  dust  was  supposed  to  facilitate  its  growth." 
Its  fruit  was  common  property.  Being  hungry  he  a[)- 
proached  this  tree  whose  rich  foliage  promised  fruit. 
Finding  nothing  but  leaves,  Jesus  said,  "  Let  no  fruit 
grow  on  thee  henceforward- forever." 

Objections  :  1.  It  is  said  if  he  had  known  there  were  no 
tigs  he  would  not  have  sought  them.  If  he  did  not  know 
then  he  is  not  omniscient.  Ans  :  The  objection  assumes 
that  he  was  bound  to  tell  all  he  knew.  2.  Why  did  he 
expect  fruit  at  this  season  ?  Mk.  says,  "  for  the  time  of 
tigs  was  not  yet."  Ans.:  a.  "It  was  not  the  time  of 
ycar^  but  the  striking  quantity  of  leaves  for  the  time  of  year, 
which  led  to  the  expectation  that  there  would  certainly 
be  figs  upon  the  tree,"  says  Ebrard.  h.  Although  not 
the  general  season  for  figs  as  Mk.  states  "  there  is  to  this 
day,  in  Palestine,  a  kind  of  white  or  early  fig  which  ripens 
in  spring,  and  much  before  the  ordinary  or  black  fig." 
Furthermore,  the  autumn  figs  often  remained  on  the 
trees  through  the  winter,  until  the  spring  leaves  had 
come.     (Farrar,  Vol.  II,,  p.  213.) 

3.  It  is  charged  that  this  act  was  not  onl\'  the  destruc- 
tion of  a  shade  tree  but  also  an  expression  of  unworthy 
anger.     Ans.  :     The  lesson  taught  is  of  far  more  import- 


136 

ance  than  tlie  tree.  Farrar  asks,  "  Is  it  a  crime  under 
any  circnmstatioes  to  destroy  a  useless  tree  ?  If  not,  is  it 
more  a  crime  to  do  so  by  miracle  ?"  This  is  the  only  in- 
stance of  a  miracle  of  Juds^meiit.  This  act  was  a  sym- 
bolic one.  The  tree  with  its  luxurious  leaves  was  a  tj'pe 
of  the  Jewish  Church,,  outwardly  flourishing,  but  inward- 
ly barren.  It  was  therefore  destroyed.  The  act  is  related 
on  the  one  hand  to  the  lamentation  over  Jerus.,  on  the 
other,  to  the  ],)arable  following,  (Farrar  Vol.  II.  pp.  215- 
16.)  Ebrard  says  Strauss's  conjecture  that  Christ  was 
moved  only  by  anger  at  not  finding  any  tigs,  "is  too 
worthless  and  wicked  tf)  have  si)rung  from  anything  but 
utter  insanity." 

Cleansing  the  Temjjle.  Symbolically,  this  act  is  the 
counterpart  of  the  preceding.  Christ  here  assumes  pos 
session  of  the  Temple  in  anticipation  of  the  future  reign 
over  the  church,  and  his  final  success.  It  was  also  the 
manifestation  of  his  Messiahship,  as  tlie  Pharisees  plainly 
understood.  For  they  said,  "  By  what  authority  doest 
thon  these  things  ?"  The  whole  Temjtle  services  were 
fulfilled  in  Christ,  who  is  God  with  us.  Temi)le  was  the 
place  where  God  then  met  with  his  peo[)le.  JSTow  in 
Christ  God  meets  with  them.  In  John  2  :  16,  it  is  writ- 
ten '•  make  not  ray  Father's  house  a  house  of  merchan- 
dise." In  Mk.  11  :  17,  "  My  house  sliall  be  called  ot  all 
nations  the  house  of  prayer."  These  two  passages  gene- 
rally considered  to  form  a  clima.x.  Emphasis  in  latter 
passage  is  on  "  all  nations,"  making  the  final  universality 
of  Christianity  prominent.  The  second  point  is  the 
spiritual  relation  of  the  people  of  God.  John  2:  13 
])oints  to  reformation;  Mk.  11:  17  to  judicial  judgment. 
Jews  must  be  driven  out  to  make  room  for  others.  The 
rulers  are  again  enraged  and  seek  to  destroy  him,  but 
fail  in  their  purpose.  This  Monday  was  a  day  of  great 
triumph,  for,  despite  the  Pharisees,  he  taught  all  day  in 
the  Temple  and  at  night  went  out  of  the  city. 

§114.  The  barren  Fig-tree  withers  aivaij.  On  the  way 
to  the  city,  in  the  morning,  the  Disciples  saw  that  the 
fig-tree  had  withered  away.  "  The  quick  eye  of  Peter 
was  the  first  to  notice  it."  Instead  of  explaining  its 
meaning,  Jesus  gives  them  a  suggestive  lesson  on  Faitli, 
and  the  encouragement  to  prayer. 

§115.  Authority  of  Christ  ejuestioned.  Having  arrived 
at  the  Temple  Christ  walked  about  and  taught  as  he  had 


\j(jJi^^utd.   cCIXj^v^^^A^  ^'^^^''^^^^-*^'^^^^^ 


^^}-^Wa.j^ 


"^  ^cxAo^t^  M>.AJ^^^-*i^     Obx.^  -Uj^i^  hXj^^-^^SiAj  olMWh 


137 

sole  autliority.  The  second  step  in  events  of  the  week 
is  found  in  events  of  this  day.  Christ  does  not  yield 
possession  of  the  Temple  to  force.  When  he  goes  it  is 
voluntarily.  Here  we  meet  with  efforts  of  the  priests  to 
destroy-  his  influence.  It  was  necessary  that  his  power 
should  be  thus  tested,  so  that  the  subsequent  surrender 
of  himself  should  be  clearly  voluntary.  The  moral  tri- 
umph of  this  day  is  the  preface  of  his  trial.  Xotice  1. 
The  assault  of  the  Sanhedrim  upon  his  authority.  It  is 
followed  by  three  parables — the  tw^o  sons,  the  wicked 
husbandmen,  and  the  marriage  of  the  king's  son.  All 
set  forth  the  character  of  the  Pharisees  and  the  nature  of 
the  judgment  to  come.  ^..Crafty  questions  intended  to 
involve  him  in  ditticulty  with  civil  authorities,  and  break 
down  his  influence.  Attempts  by  Pharisees,  Sadducees 
and  lawyers.  3.  Long  judicial  <liscourses  against  the 
Pharisees.  4.  The  prophet  discourses  concerning  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem  and  the  final  judgment  pro- 
nounced upon  his  departure  from  the  temple.  (Mt.  25.) 
This  discourse  is  the  last  of  his  public  tei'ching,  except 
the  one  on  occasion  of  the  visit  of  the  Greeks.  Jno.  12: 
20-50.  This  day  has  been  called  the  great  prophetic 
day.  Disproportionate  length  of  narrative  accounted  for 
by  fact  that  it  is  the  day  of  final  teaching. 

Result  of  the  consultation  of  the  Sanhedrim  :  They 
question  him  concerning  his  authority.  It  was  official  ; 
put  to  him  as  soon  as  he  reached  the  temple,  and  involved 
1.  The  fact  that  the  rulers  were  divinely  appointed,  and 
that  Clirist  was  acting  in  opposition  to  them.  2.  Showed 
an  appreciation  of  his  true  Messianic  claims.  Hence  it 
was  a  well  chosen  question,  for  the  people  were  unwilling 
for  any  other  than  a  temporal  Messiah.  The  Pharisees  had 
thought  to  receive  the  answer,  "  I  am  the  Christ."  But 
if  question  was  sul)tle,  the  answer  shows  Divine  wisdom. 
"  The  baptism  of  John,  was  it  from  heaven  or  of  irien  ?'" 
Alleged  that  this  answer,  like  their  question,  a  trap,  and 
unworthy  of  Christ.  But  it  is  no  evasion;  fori.  The 
Pharisees  put  the  issue  between  them  on  the  ground  of 
authority.  2.  If  John  had  divine  authority  then  his 
record  of  Jesus  was  a  suflicient  answer  to  their  question. 
The  answer  is  at  same  time  an  exposure  of  the  hypo- 
critical pretence  of  the  rulers  of  their  zeal  for  authority'. 
They   are  obliged    to  confess   their  ignorance.      Three 


138 

parables  concernino;  jnclgment  follow  closely  on  this 
defeat.  Tjesson  tau2:ht  by  them  all  is  :  rejection  of  Christ 
by  tlie  nation  transferred  its  privilejjes  and  blessings  to 
the  Gentiles.  Association  of  the  three  kept  up  in  the 
tigure.  Parable  of  two  sons.^  Makes  his  enemies  judge 
themselves.  He  sets  forth  their  sins,  hypocrisy,  unbelief, 
and  disobedience.  Primarj'  application  was  either  to 
Jews  and  Gentiles,  or  to  Pharisees  and  Publicansr  Same 
principles  involved.  <S 

§116.  Tlte  Wicked  Husbandmen.  Teaches  further  that 
the  disobedience  was  national,  and  not  negative  but  active 
persecution  and  consequent  judgment.  The  figure  of 
vineyard  is  sustained — there  conduct  was  personal,  here 
national.  Sin  was  not  only  in  refusing  the  Lord  his  vine- 
yard, but  in  killing  his  son.  The  vineyard  was  there- 
fore taken  from  them  and  given  to  the  Gentiles.  Shows 
the  love  of  God  to  his  church  ;  the  exaltation  of  Christ, 
Ps.  118.  "  The  stone  which  the  builders  rejected  is  be- 
come the  head  of  the  corner."  By  striking  transition 
Christ  depicts  a  negative  judgment.  "Whosoever  shall 
fall,  &c.,"  and  then  a  positivejudgnient  "  on  whomsoever 
it  shall  tall,  &c."  The  verb  here  means  to  zvuuioiv,  but 
in  our  version  figure  of  stone  is  retained  and  is  probably 
correct.  Personal  application  of  parable  to  Pharisees  is 
made  in  Mt.  21  :  43,  and  results  in  an  attempt  by  them 
to  assault  him. 

§117.  3:1  arriage  of  (he  King's  Son.  Figure  retained;  suc- 
cessive missions,  ill-treatment  and  refusal.  The  previous 
parables  dwelt  on  failure  of  duty,  this  teaches  forfeiture 
of  privileges  only  alluded  to  at  close  of  last.  The  grace 
of  God  more  prominent  in  this.  Main  reference  is  to  the 
calling  of  the  gentiles.  Should  be  carefully  studied  with, 
and  distinguished  from,  parable  of  the  Great  Supper  in 
Lk.  14.  Point  of  view  different  in  Mt.  '^Calling  of  Gen- 
tiles here  checking  of  Pharisaic  pride.  Climactic  relation 
of  two.  -Mt.  closes  with  entrance  of  man  without  wed- 
ding garment.  Showing  that  personal,  not  national 
qualifications  are  required.  Publicans  and  harlots  might 
otherwise  be  led  to  think  they  were  heirs  of  the  king- 
dom. Baptism,  Charity,  Faith,  Christian  life — a  new 
heart  indispensable.  Element  of  mercy  in  all  this  sever- 
ity of  Christ — warning  men  of  danger  common  to  all  and 
into  which  the  Jews  had  especially  fallen. 


4 


ClU.^   ^^^^cl^v  T?^e^_^     a^M^^^-^^a....^^   €/.uJLuU.r^4,^ 


Ci^^-^-r-tlfC 


^//  7  (3r^'rT;L^f:<^"  ]^</<ti?'^.^-t.^^     o-i-^-<s»-7'T>  'J'y\jyn^x.'i.A..,-^jty,..J\^      ^i^U? . 

/ 


^^^'^^^^M^-t-'-iW    -i-Tn^-ts^Jvi^iU^^    "td'i^^.^L.*.^  _i^^^^t^cxL<M^'Xi<.'^^ 
^Jtir^C,^:^  i^^Ccl^^^uA^  -^^^L^-^^^X^,  f --tAZ,  Z^  2,  (l^la^Qlo. 


(2a^^  ^cz,.^...^   ctoM  d?xh.    h^UtJUDtu^  jol^M^ 


^^^^    .:.    ^■.^.u_Xo._    /'i^.^ct^s^.Z..^   ^^Xa^J^^i^-^^^. 


139 

§118.  Question  of  Pharisees  concerning  Tribute.  The  Phari- 
sees thus  baffled  retire  and  take  counsel.  Renew  attack, 
intending  this  time  to  embroil  Christ  with  Pilate — send 
spies,  literally  perjurers,  with  instructions  to  be  respect- 
ful in  manner.  Dilemma — he  must  offend  either  people 
or  the  government.  The}'  expected  a  negative  answer 
which  would  justify  a  charge  of  rebellion.  Lk.  5  :  20. 
Notice  hypocrisy  of  rulers — this  decision  expected  of 
them  by  Christ  as  basis  of  a  charge,  was  to  them  a  mat- 
ter of  conscience — independence  being  a  part  of  their 
religion.  Question  also  touched  point  of  contrast  be- 
tween his  and  their  doctrine  of  the  Messianic  kingdom. 
These  two  questions  involved  whole  case  of  Pharisees — 
containing  the  two  charges  against  him  at  his  trial  of 
blasphemy  and  sedition — they  wanted  him  to  avow  his 
Divinity  and  also  to  oppose  the  Government ;  the  second, 
a  natural  sequel  of  first,  if  you  have  such  authority,  how 
reconcile  it  with  Caesar's.  But  he  replies  by  calling  for 
coin  — the  coinage  of  money  is  prerogative  of  the  ruler 
in  all  countries.  He  recognizes  distinction  between  two 
spheres  of  duty  and  that  they  are  not  inconsistent.  Pre- 
cise relation  not  here  stated.  His  answer  surprises  ques- 
tioners, silences  them,  yet  without  offence. 

§119.  Question  of  the  Sadducees.  Probably  they  came  at 
the  instigation  of  Sanhedrim.  Reply  to  previous  ques- 
tion was  on  their  side  and  they  try  now  to  evoke  a  reply 
against  the  Pharisees.  This  question  differs  in  spirit 
from  previous  one  which  tho'  hypocritical  was  serious 
and  important — this  fricolous.  Sadducees  at  first  denied 
tradition  simply  ;  then  certain  portions  of  SS.,  and  finally 
denied  the  resurrection  and  future  punishment — because 
of  their  sceptical  views.  Their  question,  based  on  Deut. 
25  :  5  which  as  law  now  obsolete  on  account  of  loss  of 
land  boundaries,  was  not  a  real  one.  Impossible  case 
of  woman  married  to  seven  brothers.  Treats  question 
as  unworthy  of  notice,  proves  resurrection  from  Ex.  3  :  6, 
"I  am  the  God  of  thy  father  &c."  He  is  not  God  of 
dead  but  of  living.  No  marriage  relation  after  resurrec- 
tion. 

Strauss  charges  Christ  with  rabbinical  finesse.  1.  The 
words  in  Ex.  simply  meant  continuance  of  covenant  rela- 
tions with  Abraham's  posterity.  2.  Admitting  words 
refer  to   future   state,  they  prove  not  resurrection   but 


140 

iniriiortalit}'  of  the  soul.  Hence  proof  is  irrelevant. 
Ans.  to  first  objection,  a.  Christ,  some  say,  not  arguing, 
but  simply  stating  the  meaning  of  passage,  b.  More 
commonly  held  that  he  does  argue.  The  relation  between 
God  and  the  Patriarchs  was  a  covenant  relation  and 
therefore  an  enduring  relation  of  force  in  both  worlds. 
Ans.  to  second  objection.  It  is  a  complete  answer  to  Sad- 
ducees,  because  their  denial  of  resurrection  was  based 
upon  denial  of  immortality  of  soul  and  greater  includes 
the  less.  Effect  on  multitude  great,  scribes  even  exclaim, 
"  Master,  well  said."  Parties  divided.  Comp.  with  Acts 
20. 

§120.  Lawyer'' s  quest'um  as  to  greatest  commandment.  Nat- 
urally follows  previous  one,  which  had  to  do  with  the 
law.  The  dilemma?  Two  views.  1.  The  question  was 
much  discussed  among  various  parties  of  the  Jews,  and 
any  commandment  specified  by  Christ  would  offend  the 
advocates  cf  all  the  others.  Stier  quotes  from  one  of  the 
Rabbins,  that  Moses  enjoined  365  prohibitions  and  248 
commands — in  all  613. 

2.  A  profound  explanation  is  that  attributed  by  Schaif 
and  Lange,  (really  as  old  as  Chrj'sostom).  The  tempta- 
tion lay  in  the  opportunity  given  our  Lord  to  assert  his 
own  Divinity.  They  expected  him  to  fix  on  the  unity  of 
God  as  the  most  important  O.  T.  truth,  and  the  command 
to  love  him,  the  greatest.  Had  he  done  so  he  would  have 
given  them  an  opening  by  which  to  lead  him  to  assert 
his  equality  with  God.  That  this  is  true  view  appears 
from  Christ's  counter  question,  "  How  could  David  call 
him  Lord  who  is  his  Son."  Christ's  answer  asserts  the 
unity  of  the  law  as  opposed  to  the  divisions  of  the  Jews, 
and  the  true  principle  of  obedience  as  love  to  God, 
whence  flows  love  to  man.  The  lawyer  is  struck  with 
conviction — "  Master,  thou  hast  well  said." 

§121.  Christ's  question  to  the  Pharisees.  "  How  does 
David  call  him  Lord  ?"  This  is  not  as  some  assert  a  mere 
evasion.  It  is  really  the  climax  of  the  whole  disputation. 
To  perceive  this  we  must  bear  in  mind  the  two  charges 
made  at  his  trial,  blasphemy  and  treason.  Both  had  been 
implied  in  the  question  concerning  his  authority  and  the 
paying  of  tribute,  and  both  are  best  answered  here. 
Christ  calls  his  enemies  to  the  main  point  in  dispute, 
"  What  think  ye  of  Christ."     Quotes  Ps.  110— admitted 


\__y  yu<^     't.Z-^,'^xcyOc•(2.Zt_<^-t —      iA^~-(^t^  ■fr-^T'T-   iiJL-t^yV   (^j-XT-y^c/    ^  Ol. 


/  f  d  Mf  *^    ^^o(Mu    /wt.^.<l-«l^^ 


^    a..f  <o<^/^^3^s^. 


^, 


-•^-2-1-/ 


(y-A-c-^ 


.-oO^-lyvJZ, 


141 

by  Jews  to  be  Messianic — the}-  do  not  deny  his  Davidic 
descent.  Christ  sliows  that  O.  T.  declares  him  to  be  very 
God  and  very  man.  He  is  David's  son  and  j-et  David's 
Lord.  By  introduction  of  this  element,  the  greatest 
commandment  of  the  Law  is  fully  stated.  The  effect  was 
— the  common  people  heard  him  gladly.  His  opponents 
cease  their  questioning.  Notice  :  the  statement,  "  No  man 
durst  ask  him  any  more  questions,"  is  made  by  each  of 
the  Evangelists,  but  at  ditferent  points  :  Mt.  22  :  46 — after 
Christ's  counter  questions;  Mk.  12:34 — after  Lawyer's 
question;  Lk.  20  :  40 — after  Saddncees'  question.  This 
difference  not  contradictory  ;  for  connection  is  really  the 
same.  Account  of  woman  taken  in  adultery,  John  8  : 1- 
11,  inserted  here  by  Lange.  But  external  authority  is 
against  the  genuineness  of  the  record.  &~^ 

§122.  Judicial  discourse  ac/ainst  (he  Pharisees.  The  ap- 
propriate close  of  the  struggle  appears  in  the  denuncia- 
tory discourse.  Christ  sums  up  all  that  he  has  said 
against  the  Pharisees  during  his  ministry.  A  considera- 
ble part  of  the  discourse  appears  in  Lk.  II.  How  is  the 
resemblance  to  be  explained  ?  Two  theories.  \.  The  same 
language  could  have  been  twice  uttered.  It  is.  likely 
therefore  that  one  Evangelist  borrowed  from  the  other  — 
or  supplemented  by  memory  from  other  discourses.  2. 
Both  passages  are  historical.  No  warrant  for  any  other 
view — appropriateness  of  passage  here  is  evident.  Divi- 
sions of  the  discourse  in  Mt.  vs.  1-13  are  occupied  with  a 
statement  of  the  true  character  of  the  Pharisees — desire 
of  praise,  uppermost  rooms,  greeting  in  the  market,  &c. 

§123.  Discourse  continued.  Woes  upon  the  Pharisees. 
Series  of  7  or  8.  These  are  the  severest  words  ever 
uttered  by  Christ.  All  previous  blood  shed  from  Abel 
to  present  required  of  this  generation.  Jews  guilty  of 
same  sins  as  their  fatliers  and  were  to  suffer  for  sins  of 
fathers.  The  sins  of  Pharisees  were  national  and  brought 
national  disaster.  Yet  Christ  shows  his  mercy  and  love 
in  his  lamentation  over  Jerusalem  vs.  37,  38.  "  Blessed 
is  he  that  cometh"  refers  to  second  advent  or  resurrec- 
tion of  Christ. 

Counterpart  of  Sermon  on  Mount,  often  noticed.  In 
that,  we  have  delineation  of  character  of  those  who  re- 
ceive the  kingdom  and  statement  of  consequent  bless- 
ings. In  this,  a  description  of  those  who  reject  the 
kingdom  and  a  recital  of  consequent  woes. 


142 

§124.  The  Widours  3Tite.  From  connection  in  Mt.  it 
is  inferred  that  departure  from  the  Temple  was  imme- 
diately after  close  of  the  judicial  discourse.  In  depart- 
ing our  Lord  has  one  warm  glance  at  piety  of  O.  T. 
Incident  here  recorded  is  in  contrast  with  preceding  dis- 
course. Sitting  down  to  watch  the  worshippers  casting 
gifts  into  the  treasury,  he  sees  a  widow  _cast  in  t\vo 
lepta,  less  than  one-fifth  of  a  cent.  Bengel  remarks  that 
light  is  thrown  upon  her  act  by  her  throwing  in  too  lepta, 
for  she  might  have  kept  one.  Christ  commends  her 
sacrificing  spirit. 

§125.  Visit  of  certain  Greeks.  John  12  :  20-26  is  perti- 
nent illustration  of  supplementary  character  of  John's 
gospels.  Notice:  1.  Connection  in  John — he  records 
nothing  of  long  discourses  against  the  Pharisees,  But 
a  knowledge  of  it  is  essential  to  the  understanding  of 
this  event.  John  thei-efore  puts  it  in  contrast  with  the 
bitterness  of  the  Pharisees  as  recorded  in  the  Synoptists. 
2.  Connection  in  harmony  suggests  similar  idea.  At 
the  close  of  the  day  of  conflict  with  Pharisees,  the 
Greeks  appear  as  the  representatives  of  the  Gentiles  and 
accept  that  kingdom  which  the  Jews  reject.  Many  har- 
monists refuse  to  separate  this  event  from  connection  in 
which  it  stands  in  John,  making  it  take  place  on  the 
day  of  Christ's  public  entrance.  Lange  arbitrarily  places 
it  on  same  day  the  Temple  was  cleansed.  But  it  comes 
in  most  naturally  when  he  leaves  the  Temple  finally. 
Were  the  Greeks  allowed  to  see  Jesus?  Some  think 
that  the  interview  was  deferred  until  after  the  Resurrec- 
tion, but  there  would  be  no  force  in  Christ's  reply  to  the 
disciples,  if  the  Greeks  were  not  present.  The  incid^»nt 
an  appropriate  close  of  the  day  of  conflict. 

§126.  John's  reflections  upon  the  unbelief  of  the  Jews  : 
y^/f^  John  12:  37-50.  Verses  44-50  are  last  words  of  Jesus 
^^"-^-^^  ^-  or  a  summing  up  of  the  Evangelists,  because  1.  They 
«r-  VM>4^are  introduced  after  Christ  went  away  and  hid  himself,  as 
^,^ijjUr\A  if  they  were  something  remembered.  2.  Jesus  stood  and 
'     cried,  which  implies  a  great  audience. 

§§127-130.  Great  Prophetic  Discourse  on  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem,  the  end  of  the  world  and  the  second  advent. 
Having  kept  possession  of  the  Temple  tor  three  days  and 
having  been  rejected  bj'  the  Jews,  Christ  now  leaves  it 
finally.     Seated    upon    the  Mt.    of   Olives    his    disciples 


^^-vvi-^Hto^P-i^t^   i^y^..'i>€LuLytQjL' JU-^   '^A^  d-t^-Ki^  ^    \Lt4juuO  ^  MaX^ 
'  >J€LUJr<^    x£jL    %^e^  /urty^^  ^:^X)3    UaA^<zjC{   ^-L 


^^^^j^  -t£^  cicJ^^  ^e,-^:^^^^-^  M.^:^^:.^-^ 


^   ^<>'^-ac^   *-uf^^  ^i^uiA^     (^^  ^iU/.  --<.'<-^ciyh         '      i-^»-^ 


'     ^  / 


U3 

come  to  him  and  speak  coiiceruing  the  Temple.  His 
public  teaching  had  ended,  but  there  were  two  import- 
ant instructions  to  disciples.  1.  The  outward  progress 
of  the  kingdom  of  Messiah  until  the  second  advent.  2. 
John  14-17  chaps,  give  the  inward  and  spiritual  condi- 
tions by  which  the  outward  triumph  was  to  be  secured. 
Such  instructions  naturally  private,  and  necessary  for 
completion  of  his  church's  preparation.  In  the  O.  T. 
prophecy,  the  advent,  the  outpouring  of  the  spirit,  the 
foundation  of  the  church  and  the  final  triumph  of  the 
Messiah's  kingdom  are  as  a  whole  connected  together. 
To  the  0.  T.  prophecies  concerning  himself,  he  had,  at 
different  times,  added  his  suffering,  death  and  resurrec- 
tion, the  persecution  of  his  disciples  and  the  necessity  of 
patient  self-denying  labor.  The  great  prophecy  belongs 
therefore  to  the  transition  stage  in  the  development  of 
prophecy.  It  stands  related  both  to  the  O.  T.  prophecies 
and  those  of  Paul  and  the  Apocalypse.  Two  things 
must  be  always  remembered  :  1.  The  main  design  of 
the  discourse  was  practical,  to  induce  patient  watch- 
fulness. Hence  a  large  part  of  Mt's  25  ch.  is  in  form  of 
parables  enforcing  this  duty.  Signs  of  the  advent  given 
are  all  negative.  The  disciples  are  to  be  on  their  guard 
against  misunderstanding  them.  2.  The  indefinite  con- 
ceptions of  disciples  connecting  the  advent  and  the  end 
of  the  world  largely  condition  the  form  of  our  Lord's 
discourse.  Tlie  combination  of  these  events  is  the  great 
difficulty  of  the  prophecy.  Christ  says  "  this  generation 
shall  not  pass  away  before  all  be  fulfilled."  The  dis- 
ciples' questions  contain  three  periods  according  to  the 
pre-millenial  theory  :  1.  When  shall  these  things  be  ? 
2.  What  shall  be  the  sign  of  thy  coming?  3.  And  of 
the  end  of  the  world  ? 

It  is  best  to  find  only  two  periods  with  two  correspond- 
ing questions.  1.  When  shall  the  destruction  of  Jerusa- 
lem be?  and  2.  When  shall  be  the  time  of  thy  coming? 
with  which  the  disciples  naturally  associated  the  end  of 
the  world. 

Relates  other  Parables — the  stewards,  the  virgins  and 
the  talents.  Parable  of  virgins  teaches  not  only  duty  of 
watchfulness  but  of  watchful  preparation.  Bridegroom 
delaying  his  coming  shows  that  the  time  of  the  advent  is 
distant.     A  current  pre-raillenial  theory    encounters  in 

/^'r~E>u-<-o-'^^'-^    L<xyt.c<J>'^^^lA  /t-'i--.<?(^tl<».i*-^     6'tx:i-'«-<-<t/e/e>  J)  /i^^^eyC^-'^^y^Lfy. 


<y-) 


144 

this  parable  a  serious  difficulty.  Strauss,  Alford  and 
others  make  it  refer  to  Christ's  coining  at  the  first  Resur- 
rection. Bride  is  restored  Jewisli  Church  ;  the  virgins 
are  the  Gentiles  who  will  accompany  him.  Some  hold 
that  the  exclusion  of  virgins  is  not  final. 

Parable  of  the  Talents.  Matt.  25:  14.  This  adds  fruit- 
fulness  to  watchful  preparation.  A  close  relation  between 
parable  of  King's  Son  and  the  Great  Supper.'  So  this  re- 
sennbles  that  of  the  Pounds  given  in  Lk.  The  differences 
are  in  the  sums  given  and  the  returns  obtained.  In  Lk. 
equal  sums  produce  different  results.  In  Mt.  the  sums 
are  different,  the  increase  is  proportionate  and  the  rewards 
are  equal.  Taken  together  they  teach  that  the  gifts  of 
Heaven  are  all  of  grace,  but  that  men  are  to  be  rewarded 
acbording  to  their  fidelity.  In  verses  31-46  we  have  the 
last  words  concerning  the  judgment  day,  where  we  find 
ground  upon  which  rewards  and  punishments  are  to  be 
based— the  treatment  of  his  people. 

Is  the  discourse  parabolic  or  prophetic  ?  Arguments 
for  the  former:  1.  Its  position,  following  so  many  para- 
bles, 2.  Its  figures — the  goats  a)id  sheep,  and  their 
separation,  the  colloquy  between  the  good  and  the  evil 
and  the  Judge.  For  its  prophetic  character  and  literal 
interpretation  :  1.  The  language  is  didactic  and  not 
figurative  and  the  form  is  changed  from  the  parabolic  to 
the  prophetic.  2.  The  king  of  the  previous  parables  is 
not  mentioned — prominent  figure  is  the  Son  of  Man,  But 
if  this  be  a  prophecy  which  judgment  is  meant?  of  the 
elect  or  of  the  non-elect  ?  or  is  it  the  General  Judgment  ? 
The  Millenarians  as  Stier,  Alford,  &c,,  say  it  is  judgment 
of  the  edvrj  as  distinguished  from  that  of  the  s/ArjZOi,  and 
give  these  reasons:  1.  Test  of  judgment  is  not  faith  but 
charity.  Christians  are  however  to  be  judged  by  their 
faith.  Ans  :  The  works  mentioned  are  expressions  of 
faith — the  outward  duty  is  taken  for  the  inward  state. 
2.  The  parties  judged  are  self-righteous,  "  Lord  when 
saw  we,  &c,,"  Ans  :  The  language  used  is  in  reality  an 
expression  of  humility.  Is  it  the  final  judgment?  The 
majority  of  autliorities  take  this  view.  The  prophecy  is 
the  fitting  climax  of  his  teaching  concerning  his  king- 
dom. 

§181,  Conspiracy  of  Rulers  and  Treason  of  Judas.  The 
perplexity  of  the  priests  stands  in  contrast  with  Christ's 


l/L^^^^  ^^i-Xyx^A-^x^K..,^     'y-N    C^Q_/U'^-">-<:^-^     «pLcarT-<U- 


•iLoo-w^ 


xi^aA-  fyLxA/h  j£y>^way  a-.^.t^y^c^:-^-^.^^^M-^£^^^ 


ox^^viAiti^  Ti<xi  yt^ 


uA^ximtd  Uvo^  -iMjv/lwkj 


145 

foreknowledge.  The}'  had  eoucluded  they  could  not 
Take  him  at  the  feast,  but  Jesus  knew  that  he  was  to  die. 
Mt.  26:  1,  2  contain  a  distinct  prediction  of  the  cruci- 
fixion. The  baffled  rulers  hold  council  and  seek  how 
they  may  accomplish  his  death  by  craft.  Opportunity 
for  them — Judas  appears.  They  are  rejoiced  and  offer 
him  a  bribe.  The  traitor  sets  himself  to  watch  an  oppor- 
tunity to  betray  his  master  without  inciting  resistance. 
Opportunity  is  offered  sooner  than  he  expected.  The 
Synoptists  go  back  to  the  Supper  at  Bethan}'  to  account 
for  his  appearance.  His  hypocrisy  was  there  exposed 
and  by  his  malice  the  purpose  of  God  was  accomplished. 
Wheri^dki_Jadas  go  to  the  Priests  '?  If  lie  went  to  them  on 
Saturday  night  after  the  Supper  he  was  in  collusion  with 
them  during  the  prophetic  day;  oi*he  may  have  formed 
the  design  in  his  mind  during  the  feast,  and  have  held  an 
interview  with  the  priests  on  Tuesday  night  when  they 
were  enraged  by  Christ's  discourses,  and  ready  to  make 
a  bargain  with  him.  Or  if  Robinson's  arrangement  be 
correct,  placing  the  Supper  on  Tuesday  night,  then  Judas 
was  with  the  priests  on  Wednesday.  The  choice  is  be- 
tween the  first  two  views.  When  did  consultation  of 
priests  occur,  Tuesday  or  Wednesda}'  ?  It  depends  upon 
the  method  of  counting  the  "  two  days"  spoken  of  by 
Christ.  Some,  as  Alford  and  Ellicott,  count  inclusively, 
making  it  Wednesday  night.  The  more  common  way 
is  to  count  exclusivel}'.  Two  days  before  Thursday 
brings  it  then  to  Tuesday  evening.  The  [dotting  was  at 
same  time  as  tlie  discourses.  This  leaves  Wednesday  as 
a  day  of  rest  in  Bethany,  a  feature  of  the  history  which 
Robinson's  scheme  leaves  out.  The  Qonsultation  of  the 
Pharisees  was  informal,  and  held  in  the  court  of  Caiaphas 
— tradition  says  at  his  country  house  at  the  top  of  the 
Hill  of  Evil  Counsel,  where  monument  of  Annas  the 
father-in-law  of  Caiaphas  is  found.  No  certainty  about 
this.  The  price  of  betrayal,  recorded  by  Mt.  only,  was  30 
pieces  of  silver,  about  $18,  the  price  of  a  slave,  Ex.  21 :  32. 
Zech.  11 :  12,  13.  Smallness  of  price  shows  contempt  of 
rulers  for  Christ.  Character  and  motives  of  Judas.  His 
name  Iscarot  is  variously  explained.  Some  make  it  .  .  ; 
mean,  man  with  a  bag  ;  others,  strangling,  alluding  to  i^'''^*^  '^ 
his  death.  But  most  commonly,  ish  Kerioth,  a  man  of  i^^-^^^J^^ 
Kerioth,  a  place  in  South  of  Judea.     His  office   among  ^^-^ -M^<i^ 


146 

the  Twelve  was  steward  or  almoner,  (Lk.  8  :  1-3.)  The 
money  entrusted  to  him  was  not  only  for  the  support  of 
Christ  and  his  disciples  but  for  charity. 

Difficulties.  1.  Strauss  and  Meyer  sa\'  that  S3'noptists 
and  John  do  not  harmonize — former  say  Judas  went  to 
the  Priests  immediately  after  the  feast  in  Bethany,  the 
latter,  after  Satan  had  entered  into  him  at  the  Supper. 
Ans :  According  to  the  accounts  Satan  entered  into  him 
at  different  times.  The  objection  takes  for  granted  that 
Judas  could  not  have  dallied  with  an  evil  thought  for 
several  days.  All  that  John  says  is  that  his  sin  was  in 
consequence  of  the  entrance  of  Satan.  2.  It  is  alleged 
that  the  Gospels  do  not  furnish  an  adequate  motive  for 
Judas'  treachery — the  amount  paid  is  too  small  even  for 
the  priests  to  offer.,  mwch  less  for  Judas  to  accept.  Ans  : 
The  objection  does  not  properly  estimate  either  the 
power  or  the  extent  of  covetousness.  The  smallest  sum 
is  suflScient  incentive  for  the  greatest  crime  when  it  is 
once  admitted  as  a  motive  power. 

Contrast  with  Mary  :  At  the  Supper,  the  disciples  com- 
plained of  the  waste  occasioned  by  the  anointing  of 
Christ.  In  succeeding  verses  Synoptists  go  on  to  show  ^ 
that  Judas  sold  Christ  for  30  pieces  of  silver,  one-third  ^^ 
the  cost  of  anointing.  Contrast  not  fortuitous.  John 
says  Judas  did  not  care  for  the  poor,  but  complained  of 
the  waste  because  he  was  a  thief  and  had  the  bag.  John 
therefore  puts  character  of  Judas  on  a  still  lower  level, — ■ 
not  only  covetous  but  dishonest.  3.  It  is  said  that  the 
rebuke  of  Jesus  was  too  mild  to  cause  resentment;  i.  e., 
Judas  was  too  bad  a  man  to  be  offended  at  a  mild  rebuke. 
Ans  :  To  be  exposed  for  meanness  before  a  company  is 
not  pleasant  however  mild  the  language  of  rebuke. 
Dilemma :  Did  Jesus  know  the  character  of  Judas  when 
he  chose  him  for  a  disciple  ?  John  (6  :  64)  says  he  knew 
his  true  character  a  year  before.  If  so,  how  then  explain 
Mt.  26  :  24  ?  If  Jesus  knew  him,  why  did  he  appoint 
him  treasurer  and  place  him  in  way  of  temptation  ?  Wh}' 
did  he  choose  him  as  a  disciple  at  all,  and  why  did  he 
bear  so  long  with  his  hypocrisy  ?  Yet  on  other  hand  if 
Christ  did  not  know  him,  he  was  not  omniscient.  Ans  : 
Judas  was  necessary  to  the  bringing  about  of  the  cruci- 
fixion. Strauss  declares  he  was  not.  We  answer,  the 
divine  plan  was  that  Jesus  should  suffer  at  the  feast,  and 


Cjnr\X^'j^A   Co^^^^  .^-v^UIaA^ 


X^-^^-^-e^   (g^.r^<^     ZX^r^     X^y  ^cU:    ^    i^    J^th-y^rsJU ^^i^U^A^ 


147 

to  this  end  was  Jiiuas  t'oreordained.  Christ's  death  was 
to  be  accomplished  by  the  lowest  form  of  human  de- 
pravity— dying  for  the  sins  of  men,  he  must  die  through 
the  most  heinous  pliase  of  sin.  His  humiliation  is  the 
deeper  on  account  of  Judas's  treachery,  oleander's  idea  : 
Christ  thought  he  could  reform  Judas,  who  was  a  political 
adventurer.  This  view  is  held  by  some.  Judas  expected 
to  hold  a  high  position  in  Messiah's  kingdom,  but  Christ's 
public  entrance  and  the  discourses  following  assured  him 
his  hopes  could  not  be  realized,  and  tilled  with  rage  and 
disappointment  he  betrays  Jesus.  Alford  and  others 
think  Judas  may  have  been  uncertain  as  to  the  result. 
His  betraj-al  of  Jesus  was  intended  oidj^  to  result  in  his 
trial.  Even  on  this  theory,  notice  Judas  took  care  to 
get  the  money.  Whately  and  Hanna  aver  that  Judas 
thought  Jesus  would  rescue  himself  by  some  great  mira- 
cle, expecting  thus  to  have  establishment  of  Christ's 
external  kingdom  hastened.  His  motive  thus  made  out 
to  be  a  good  one.  Ans  :  1.  It  is  inconceivable  that  Judas 
could  have  had  such  an  idea — he  must  then  have  been 
insane.  2.  In  the  Gospels  the  motive  made  prominent'- 
is  covetousness,  which  was  sufficient  to  produce  the  result. 
To  this  is  joined  resentment  for  rebuke  received  from 
Christ  at  the  Supper. 

3.  A  fair  inference  is  tliat  he  was  disappointed  in  his 
expectations  as  to  the  nature  of  the  kingdom.  This 
however  does  not  alleviate  the  bad  character  of  the  man. 
"By  their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them."  Lange  says  that 
when  Judas  received  the  monc}'  he  put  himself  outside 
the  pale  of  honorable  motives. 

§132.  Preparation  for  the  Passover.  Wieseler  and  Rob- 
inson say  Nisan  14th.  Bleek  and  Tischendorf  say  Thurs- 
day, Nisan  15th.  Wednesday  had  been  spent  as  a  day  of 
quiet  at  Bethany.  The  common  arrangement  adds  to 
this  rest  a  portion  of  Thursday.  The  Passover  Supper 
was  eaten  on  the  first  [r/j  Tipcotrj)  day  of  the  feast  of 
Unleavened  Bread — in  the  evening.  During  the  daj', 
close  search  was  made  for  leaven  which  was  the  symbol 
of  that  which  must  be  put  away.  That  this  Supper  was 
the  regular  Passover  Supper  is  proved,  1.  By  zrj  Ttpcorvj. 
This  expression  implies  that  it  must  be  so.  2.  From  the 
definite  expression  that  follows,  "  When  the  Passover 
must  be  killed."     3.  Agrees  with  fact  that  priests  had  to 


148 

kill  the  lamb  in  the  Temple.  4.  The  remark  of  the  dis- 
ciples, "  where  shall  we  prepare,"  &c.,  shows  that  the 
time  had  come.  Sends  two  disciples  who  find  the  place 
by  a  miraculous  method.  Objection  that  Mt.  makes  no 
mention  of  this.  But  there  is  no  contradiction,  and  the 
miraculous  is  implied.  Objection:  Difficulty  of  obtaininjo; 
a  place  after  preparations  liad  been  so  long  delayed. 
Jerusalem  crowded,  even  surrounding  hills  being  occu- 
pied with  tents.  Answer :  Enough  for  the  man  to  be 
told,  "  the  master  needs  a  room."  Secrecy  the  reason  of 
dela}'  ;  state  of  feeling  in  the  city  concerning  Christ  and 
bargain  of  Judas  on  previous  evening  made  it  necessary. 
Finding  room  as  directed,  j'eter  and  John  prepac&^foj:. 
the  Supper  unleavened  bread,  bitter  herbs,  amljjanib. 
Lamb,  previously  purchased  and  set  apart,  was  carried 
to  temple  between  three  and  six  o'clock;  slain  by  the 
priests  and  its  blood  sprinkled. 

Passover  Supper.      Order  of  Events.     Diflerence  of  opin- 
ion— on    several    points  certainty     is    impossible.       But 
best  harmonists  are   substantially  agreed.     Mt.  and  Mk. 
agree  in  simple  narrative.     Lk.  gives  Christ's  words  at, 
opening  of  the  meal,     John  gives  incident  of  washing^ 
disciples'  feet.      Commonl}-  agreed  that  coiitention   for 
precedency    aud    the    washing   of  feet  are    to  be  placad  , 
tjo»;ether;     because  [a)  Former    would    naturally   occur 
upon  taking  ijlaces  at  the  table  ;  {b)  Latter,  in  beginning 
or  during  the  meal.     Our  version  (John   13  :  2)  implies 
it  was  after  the  meal — ysuofiipotj  should  be  yivofjiivou,  sup- 
per "  being  come" ;  (c)  connection  in  Lk.  (v.  24)  syevcTo 
ds,   an  aorist,  better  rendered   "  there  was,"  not  "  had 
been  "  ;  (c/)  Design  of  Lk.    for  narrating  events   out   of 
natural  order,  was   to  contrast  solemnity   of  scene   and 
Christ's  authority  and  dignity  with    laxity   of  disciples. 
Lk.'s  order  is  ;  Christ's  words — question  of  precedency 
— Peter's  denial  and  desertion  of  all  ;   (e)     Find__Ujaturi]J 
order  in  John  :  (f)     The_lnteniaL.agreem^^ 
accounXjvvith_John!sj:ea4sJj^^ 

Was  Judas  present  at  the  Eucharist  ?  Lk.  puts  institu- 
tion before  pointing  out  of  traitor;  Mt.  and  Mk.  after. 
Most  reformed  writers  deny  presence  of  Judas,  because 
a.  Inherent  probability  that  he  was  sent  out  before  the 
sacrament,  h.  John  says,  (13  :  30,)  Judas  went  out  im- 
mediately after  receiving  the  sop,  and  Eucharist  not  be- 


iL^a-x^^^^yJU 


y(La^^ 


/4'->^yh    6n^l-      ct-i^-il.     ^  ^$L<^-.^^^J2_/  Q/xJMny^^^^  C-^^wv.<...,yJ5^ 


149 

fore  that.  c.  Pointing  out  was  while  eating,  but  sacra- 
ment was  after  supper.  Judas  took  wine  as  well  as  bread 
before  he  left.  d.  Lk.  changes  order.  1.  To  contrast 
spirit  of  Supper  and  spirit  of  disciples.  2.  Mention  of 
cup  in  V.  17  naturally  leads  him  to  describe  the  Supper. 

Exact  lime  of  insfitutuu/  Sacrament.  See  Lightfoot  for 
description  of  Rabbinical  customs.  Possible  that  Christ 
followed  all  the  customs  and  observances,  but  still  evi- 
dent that  Lord's  Supper  was  grafted  on  the  Paschal  Sup- 
per. Cannot  identify  exact  time.  Christ  may  have 
chosen  to  contrast  the  Supper. 

§133.  Opening  inords  ami  contention  of  the  Twelve.  They 
were  seated — original  rule  to  stand,  reminding  of  haste 
in  leaving  Egypt.  Christ  in  sanctioning  this  departure 
from  the  rule,  teaches  that  we  are  not  bound  in  unessen- 
tials.  Prominence  of  Saffering.  "With  desire  I  have  de- 
sired to  eat  this  Passover  witli  3'ou  before  I  suffer" — 
hinting  that  his  suffering  is  near  at  hand.  Reason  for 
the  desire — "  For  I  will  not  eat  again  until  it  be  fulfilled 
in  the  kingdom  of  God '' — makes  last  supper  emphatic. 
He  takes  "  cup  of  blessing  " — not  cup  of  sacrament, 
which  is  mentioned  in  20  .  v.  Inference  is  unfounded, 
that  Christ  did  not  partake.  Main  idea  of  passage  is  in 
TtkTjpcodrj^^.  Central  point  of  economy  of  Redemption  is 
reached — type  fulfilled  in  presence  of  Antetype.  N'otice 
allusion  to  the  formulas  offcast  in  t'jy^aoc(7zf]aa:;. 

Contention  for  pre-eminence.  Objections  to  its  occurrence. 
1.  Strauss  and  DeWette.  Mentioned  only  in  Lk.  and 
the  promise  of  exaltation  is  out  of  place.  2.  Unnatural 
that  such  dispute  should  occur  among  disciples  at  such  a 
time.  Ans  :  It  had  occurred  before,  and  clearly  shows 
strong  impression  existing  among  theni  even  now  of 
external  nature  of  Christ's  kingdom.  Jesus  rebukes 
their  worldly  spirit — teaching  that  only  humility  can 
exalt;  commends  fidelity  and  promises  exaltation  to 
thrones  of  judgment  of  twelve  tribes. 

§134.  Washing  disciples'  feet.  It  may  have  been  done 
on  entering,  John  13:  1-20;  hinted  at  in  Lk.  22:  27. 
John  puts  it  after  receiving  of  wine.  Three  lessons :  a. 
Proof  of  continued  love  of  Christ.  b.  Example  of 
humility,  c.  Implied  sanctification — washing  of  grace, 
a  part  of  Christ's  service.  J^iii  only  refers ^o  Judas's 
treachery  13  :  11.     Ps.  41  :  9  fulfilled.  — _, 


150 

§135.  Pointing  out  the  Traitor.  Separation  of  Judas 
preceded  the  sacrament.  Christ's  distress  very  great  at 
horror  of  the  crime  and  sorrow  for  Judas.  Announce- 
ment withheld  till  now  that  Judas  may  be  kept  near. 
Made  noio :  1.  To  show  Christ's  foreknowledge,  and 
make  disciples  believe  after  it  occurred.  2.  To  be  rid  of 
.Judas'  presence.  3.  To  carry  out  Christ's  design  of  being 
crucified  at  the  Feast.  4.  As  a  warning  to  disciples  and 
ail  his  followers. 

Effect  on  Disciples  :  At  intimation  of  Christ  that  one 
of  them  should  betray  him — natural  they  should  not 
suspect  Judas.  Ask  eacli  other  "  Is  it  I?"  Translation 
does  not  give  force  of  Gk.  ;  better  read,  "  Lord  it  is  not 

1,  is  it?"  More  simple  and  negative.  Synoptists  make 
each  disciple  ask  it  of  Christ.  John  omits  this  ;  says 
Peter  beckoned  to  John  to  ask.  Mt.  and  Mark  give 
Christ's  reply,  "  He  that  dippeth,"  &c. ;  .John,  "  To  whom 
I  give  the  sop." 

Objections:  1.  John's  account  does  not  imply  private 
communication  of  Peter,  and  act  of  dipping  together 
could  not  be  distinctive.  Ans  :  The  act  of  simultaneous 
dipping  could  be  so  marked  as  to  call  attention  to  Judas. 

2.  If  public  sign  given,  it  could  not  afterwards  be  said 
they  did  not  understand  his  treason.  Ans  :  Objection 
based  on  wrong  conception  of  amount  of  their  knowledge. 
They  did  not  know  that  betrayal  would  lead  to  cruci- 
fixion. Andrews,  &c.,  put  questions  of  Syu.  prior  to  that 
of  John,  and  j:)oint  to  iniquity  of  deed.  Again  Mt.  and 
Mk's  description  more  general  than  John's.  "  Son  of 
Man  goeth  .....  but  woe,  &c.,"  often  quoted 
in  proof  of  eternal  punishment  on  ground  that  hope  of 
salvation  after  ])eriod  of  disappointment  would  always 
render  life  desirable  rather  than  never  to  have  been  born. 

Judas' s  perplexiti/  :  Feeling  that  the  words  were  di- 
rected to  him  and  seeing  attention  of  disciples  directed 
to  him,  he  asks  also,  "  Is  it  I?" — consummate  hypocrisy. 
Night  when  he  went  out,  implies  quickness  of  his  plan — 
time  was  God's,  deed  was  Judas's.  Also  significant  of 
darkness  he  was  soon  to  enter.  Christ's  glorying  is 
come.  Departure  of  Judas  was  sign  of  his  victory — and 
the  beginning  of  his  death  and  glory.  "  A  new  Com- 
/nandment ;"  neiv  not  \n  principle  or  in  measure,  but  in 
degree  and  mode.  Brotherly  love  among  christians  made 
test  of  discipleship — love  flowing  from  faith  in  Christ. 


C^-CdJ^ 


c//^  OU:^    i-^W  ya^^-2/W-^^.wtfV  >^  x//.5M^. 


^7 


^-^^-^--^-^^^^  £.  ec^     Z:^  .  <^  t:i-a-t/(iZ>^i/tXH^   ..(^y&-^^^vC^  .t..,^    ...J^JUlJl_^ 


^CX-'ii^iV. 


151 

/37§1^.   Prediction  of  Peter's  denial  and  dispersion  of  (he 
Twelve.     John    relates    denial   in    close  connection   with 
Christ's  prophecy  about  goins^  away.     Lk.  in  connection 
with  strife  for  [jrecedence  ;   Mt.  and  Mk.  after  the  sacra- 
ment, as  if  spoken  on  way  to  Gethsemane.      Two  alterna- 
tives :  Robinson  combines  these — prediction  uttered  once 
and  before  sacrament.     Mt.    and    Mk.   therefore   relate 
them  retrospectively.     Mej-er,  &c.,  say,   prediction    was 
uttered  twice  to  include  twelve  with  Peter;  at  the  Supper, 
John  and  Lk. ;  and  on  waj'  to  Gethsemane,  (Mt.  and  Mk.) 
Design  of  prediction  to  fortify  disciples  and  prepare  them 
for  trial  of  their  faith — their  conception  of  Christ's  king- 
dom was  so  mistaken,  they  needed  to  be  humbled.     This 
design  shown  also  in  Christ's  appointment  to  go   before 
into  Galilee  after  his  resurrection.     What  they  did  does 
not  indicate  utter  apostasy — still  sheep,  though  scattered. 
He  will  deliver  them   by  interceding — "  I   have  prayed 
for  you  that  your  faith  fail   not."     The    Cock's    Growing. 
Mt.,  Lk.  and  John — "  cock  not  crow  ;"  Mk.,  "  not  crow 
twice  till  thou  hast  denied  me  thrice." 
/36§i3^-    The  Eucharist.     The  last  passover  culminated  in 
the  institution    of  the  Sacrament.     It  now   becomes    a 
commemorative  and  jjiit  a  typical  ordinance.      Changed 
by  Christ    in    person,  its    celebration   by  his  people   in 
future  will  signify  to  them  ;  a.  A   memorial   expfessive. 
ofjiis  dying  love,     h.  A  pledge  or  seal  of  his  covenant. 
c.  To  be  partaken  of  by  all  on    his  authority  and  thus 
unite  them    to    him.     Shows   man's   inability  to  live   a 
spiritual  life.     Needs  an  outward  sign  to  strengthen  weak 
faith.     This  rite  is  distinctive  mark  of  Christians  in    all 
ages;  sets  forth  Christ's  death,  and  spiritual  presence — 
"  the  life  of  the  crucified  Savior."     Precise  time   not  cer- 
tain.    Paragraph  in  John  so  close  that  it  is  impossible 
to  break  it.     Lange  and  Tisch.  place  it  in  32  v,     A  more 
prevalent  view  is  that  sacrament  came  between  13  and  14 
chaps,  of  John — confirmed  by  hymn   being  sung  after- 
wards.    Some  associate  the  bread  with  the  supper,  and 
cup  after — but  more  probable  that  the  elements  were  not 
separated.     Variations    in    words    of  record ;   Lk.    and 
Paul  (1  Cor.  11 :  24)  are  alike  ;  Mt.  and  Mk.  are  alike  ; 
but  add,  after  distribution  of  bread  the   blessing  of  the 
cup.     Explanation  :  Some  think  prayer  was   repeated — 
yet  this  was  not  essential  to  celebration   or  Paul   would 


152 

not  have  omitted  it.  Bat  the  blessing  or  (hanksr/iving 
should  be  made  fci-  both  elements.  Sceptics  magnify 
these  discrepancies.  But  these  words  are  repeated  con- 
versationally and  taken  from  Aramaic  where  ^'-  is  "  isjiot 
expressed:  "this  my  bod3^"  Note  also  that  1.  These 
variations  give  fuller  idea  to  the  meaning.  2.  They  allow 
freedom  in  celebration  of  the  sacrament.  3.  How  are 
we  to  distinguish  between  binding  acts  in  the  ordinance 
and  those  not  binding?  Ans  :  a.  Nothing  actually  binding 
which  does  not  appear  in  each  account,  b.  Nothing 
binding  which  is  not  intended  to  be  such  by  Christ.  4. 
Is  there  distinction  between  breaking  bread  and  pouring 
out  of  wine?  The  tvvo_acts  are  really  one.  Paul  makes 
no  distinction — neither  without  the  other.  Bread  signi- 
fies nourishment  of  life.  Wine  shows  more  clearly 
atonement;  jy  blood  of  new  covenant  we  are  united  to 
Christ.  5.  Did  Jesns  commune?  Lk.  22:  15.  "  Took 
cup  and  gave  thanks,"  &c.  Mey.'r  and  others  think  our 
Lord  only  gave  to  disciples  and  did  not  partake  himself 
Alford,  that  he  took  of  Supper,  but  not  of  Sacrament. 
Most  think  there  is  no  distinction.  He  partakes  with  his 
people — as  their  head.  "  I  will  no  more  drink  of  it," 
&c.,  implies  that  he  drank.  0 — ' 

Sceptical  Objections  :  Strauss  admits  a  degree  of  proba- 
bility ill  the  occurrence  of  the  Supper.  Jesus  may  have 
instituted  it  as  a  raliyiiig:4)oint  for  his  disciples.  Others 
deny  any  evidence  that  it  was"to  be  repeated  as  a  bind- 
ing ordinance.  It  was  only  for  disciples — had  no  refer- 
ence to  the  future.  The  celebration  is  due  to  and  rests 
upon  Paul's  words  (I  Cor.  11  ch.,)  written  long  after  its 
adoption  by  the  church  and  therefore  must  have  grown 
up  at  a  later  period.  Ans  :  1.  Perpetual  observance  is 
alluded  to  by  the  Syn.  Mention  of  the  Passover  itself 
is  enough.  "  My  blood  of  the  new  covenant  shed  for 
many,"  has  no  meaning  if  confined  to  disciples.  "I 
will  not  drink  it  until  I  drink  it  new  in  the  kingdom," 
&c.,  referred  by  best  exegesis  to  union  and  communion 
of  Christ  with  his  disciples.  2.  Institution  does  not  rest 
on  divine  communication  to  church  alone,  but  on  author- 
ity of  the  Twelve  as  inspired  witnesses.  It  is  thus  one 
of  the  most  important  and  authoritative  monumental 
records.  It  was  universal  in  the  church  from  earliest 
times,  must  therefore  have  been  established  by  the  apos- 


Z,QyuJM^<J<^<^t    ^^^^^'^^■^^^■^^^^^^^^^■^  j  Qj^u^ 


_7-<Ux;^X't?o-t^  ,     '"'^r -■'>^>^-'^>Uyt-~  jdyZ[7[J<:j  r:f^y^--^ry^  oc^<^U.Jt^)^cCc 

6A.W.5&  ^.^.u^^^,.,  ^^f:^^  ./...,^ 


yy/^  t^  /  Y"^  ^d^.^A^  ^ 


153 

ties.  Second  Objection  :  John's  Gospel  leaves  out  the  Sup- 
per, but  gives  washing  of  disciples'  feet.  Ans:  John  is 
supplementary. 

Strauss  asks  why  then  did  he  not  leave  out  the  feeding 
of  the  5000,  which  is  in  all  other  Gospels?  John  would 
naturally  be  disposed  to  mention  supper,  especially  on 
opportunity  to  correct  a  false  representation.  Ans: 
Supper  already  in  church  when  John  wrote  and  there- 
fore needed  no  mention.  Strauss  says  too  important. to 
be  left  out.  Ans  :  It  was  not  adapted  to  John's  purpose, 
Strauss  denies  this. 

Others  say  John  was  ignorant  of  the  institution.  This 
supposition  would  accord  with  John's  context  but  not 
with  his  practice.  His  purpose  to  record  Christ's  lono- 
discourses  requies  mention  of  feeding  5000.  Omission  of 
Lord's  Supper  only  shows  characteristic  difference  be- 
tween John  and  other  evangelists. 

§§138-141.  Final  Discourse  and  Prayer.  John's  ac- 
count, 14-17  chs.,  to  be  inserted  in  Mt.  26  between  29 
and  30  vs.  ;  in  Mk.  14  between  25  and  26  vs.  Different 
opinions  :  a.  He  went  into  a  safe  room  unknown  to  Judas. 
b.  Lange,  &c.,  infer  that  John  14  was  spoken  at  table, 
and  remainder  of  discourse  on  way  to  Gethsemane.  c. 
Difficulty  then  of  separating  discourse.  When  was 
hymn  sung?  Whether  last  thing  before  they  went  out, 
or  after  John  14:  31,  or  after  the  whole  is  uncertain. 

Historical  jyosition  and  design  of  Discourses  :  A  summino- 
up  of  Christ's  teaching  as  a  system — complete — connect- 
ed with  \\\^  going  away.  It  is  our  Lord's  fullest  expo- 
sitioiiof  the  cpiisequeiices  of  his  resurrection  and  gift 
of  ho\y  Spirit — properly  a  transitional  discourse.  Per- 
soiTal  position  of  disciples  a  type  of  the  church— -they 
were  in  sorrow  and  fear.  He  teaches  necessity  of  his 
going  away  and  promises  to  send  Holy  Spirit  to  build  up 
the  spiritual  kingdom  he  had  established.  Compare 
previous  discourse  m  Mt.  24  and  25  on  great  prophetic 
day.  Interval  of  vicissitudes  and  judgments  between 
his  death  and  second  Advent,  but  inward  life  and  knowl- 
edge of  church  were  also  to  be  extended.  It  combines 
the  general  elements  with  personal  elements  of  tender- 
ness and  love.  Every  distress  of  the  believer  finds  relief 
in  these  chapters — germ  of  the  Gospel.  Meyer  says  no 
need  to  descend  to  proof  of  divine  origin. 


154 

Common  misconception  in  regard  to  the  disciples 
thinking  too  much  of  what  they  oughtAohave  been.  Nar- 
rative guards  against  this ;  Christ  said  so  much  in  order 
that  the  spirit  miglit  bring  to  their  remembrance  what 
had  been  said.  They  were  in  trouble  and  in  sympathy 
with  their  Lord,  but  did  not  understand  their  condition. 
The  whole  prophecy  was  addressed  to  their  misconcep- 
tion. 

Analysis:  Ch.  14,  Christ  goes  to  the  Father,  and  promi- 
ses the  Spirit — vs.  1-14  ;  going  to  the  Father,  he  would 
answer  prayer — vs.  15-17;  give  Holy  Spirit — vs.  18-24: 
does  not  imply  separation  from  his  dispiciples.    2.7~>o 

Conditions,  vs.  25-26  :  Inspiration  ;  vs.  2l-=Sjft.  Bene- 
diction. Ch.  15,  Christ  the  Vine:  Fundamental  work  of 
the  spirit,  union  with  Christ.  Those  holding  that  he  set 
out  for  Gethsemane  after  record  in  14th  ch.,  say  figure 
was  suggested  to  him  by  a  vine  on  the  roadside  and  by 
burning  of  pruned  branches  ;  others,  that  he  took  figure 
from  gold  vine  around  the  pillars  of  the  Temple;  others, 
with  more  probability,  that  association  of  the  cup  was 
sufficient.  Vs.  1-11;  Union,  condition  of  fruitfulness 
and  of  God's  love  ;  vs.  12-19;  Union  with  each  other;  vs. 
20-25  :  Relation  to  the  world;  vs.  26,  27:  Personal  and 
official  gift  of  Holy  Spirit.  Chp.  16,  Work  of  Holy  Spirit  ; 
vs.  1-4,  belong  to  last  ch.  ;  persecution  predicted  ;  vs.  5- 
15:  Work  of  Holy  Spirit  in  the  world  to  convince  and 
guide  the  church  to  truth  ;  vs.  15-22  :  Departure  imme- 
diate;  vs.  23,  24  :  Hearer  of  prayer;  vs.  25-33  :  Father's 
love  and  warning. 

Ch.  17,  Sacerdotal  Prayer  :  Vs.  1-5,  for  himself,  that 
he  may  be  glorified;  vs.  6-11,  for  disciples  that  they 
might  be  one;  vs.  12-19,  that  they  might  be  sanctified; 
vs.  20-23  prays  for  all  believers  ;  vs.  24-26,  that  they 
might  be  brought  to  his  glory. 

.^142.  Gethsemane.  The  Syn.  record  the  agony  in  the 
Garden.  After  singing  the  Hallel,  Christ  descends  to 
the  streets  to  go  to  Olivet.  A  cold  night — Peter  warmed 
himself;  and  it  was  moonlight,  for  the  Passover  was  at 
full-moon.  Preparation  completed,  he  went  according  to 
his  custom  to  Olivet  to  spend  the  interval  in  prayer. 
Passing  out  of  the  eastern  gate,  he  descends  to  the 
brook  Kedron,  (fr.  xedfjoz,  cedar,  or  to  be  dark)  now  red 
with  blood  of  sacrifice ;   a  stream   dry  in  Summer,  but 


J  IaSL^    ytyU-i^yUL-    ^ 


~AAyuu}(^  ^ 


P 

•    iJ 


-iy^xy^UiJ^-       " 


155 

swollen  in  Winter  from  n'in  ;  its  bed  60  to  80  feet  below 
the  present  surface.  Crossing  this  they  reach  y^iopeov,  a 
cultivated  spot — Gethsemane — surrounded  by  a  stone 
wall,  150  or  160  feet  high,  situated  half  a  mile  from  the 
city  wall.  Objection  :  Too  near  the  city  for  retirement. 
Ans  :  It  may  have  been  concealed  by  trees.  Traditional 
site  contains  eight  olive  trees  said  to  have  been  growing 
ill  time  of  Christ,  and  the  tax-levy  on  which  can  be  traced 
up  to  occupation  of  Jerusalem  by  Arabs  in  seventh  cen- 
tury. 

Leaving  the  rest  to  pray,  he  takes  Peter,  James  and 
John  to  witness  his  sorrow:  prays  alone,  returns,  finds 
them  asleep  ;  remonstrates  "  Could  ye  not  watch  with 
me  one  hour?"  "The  spirit  is  willing  but  the  flesh  is 
weak."  Some  say  this  is  an  apology  for  their  weakness  ; 
others  that  spiritual  or  regenerated  nature  was  willing 
but  corrupt  nature  weak;  others,  sleep  due  to  force  or 
depth  of  personal  feeling.  But  Jesus  evidently  treats  it  tr^ 
as  a  weakness.  The  prayer  :  Mt.  and  Mk.  sa}'  it  was 
thrice  repeated  "  falTing  on  his  face."  Lk.  says  •'  kneel-  ,.^^^ 
ing  duwn  "  and  intimates  no  repetition — an  angel  ap-  -^-^^ 
peared  and  he  prayed  more  intensely.  Lk.  adds  also, 
"  his  sweat  was  as  it  were  great  drops  of  blood."  Some 
say,  like  blood,  i.  e.,  in  large  drops.  More  commonly 
understood  as  blood-colored — showing  sympathy  of  his 
physical  with  spiritual  nature;  agony  caused  palpitation 
of  heart,  weakening  the  frame  so  that  blood  oozed  from 
the  pores  and  colored  the  sweat.  Prayer  for  relief  not 
to  be  explained  away  ;  it  was  real  and  sincere.  "  Thy 
will  be  done ;"  same  words  he  taught  his  disciples. 
These  words  play  conspicuous  part  in  discussion  of  Per- 
son of  Christ — being  exhibition  of  weakness  of  his 
humanity.  No  authority  to  restrict  the  "  cup  "  to  sufler- 
ings  in  Gethsemane — refers  also  to  his  death.  Mk.  says 
this  hour,  i.  e.  appointed  season  of  the  passion.  That 
suffering  was  natural  anguish  upon  approaching  death, 
is  lowept  view  and  unsatisfactory,  giving  ground  to  infi- 
dels who  say  others  not  having  as  lofty  notions  as  Christ 
died  more  nobly.  Strauss  makes  it  derogatory  to  char- 
acter of  Jesus  and  considers  accounts  given  only  as 
opinions.  Renan  suggests  a  moral  ground  for  his  suf- 
ferring — his  disappointed  expectations,  and  sorrow  for 
his  people.     None  of  these  theories  sufficient  to  account 


156 

for  fact.  Suiferiiig  therefore  must  have  been  for  sin. 
His  anticipations,  though  great,  were  exceeded  by  realit}'. 
This  excess  of  anticipated  distress  not  superfluous.  Some 
suggest  its  important  relation  to  agony  on  the  cross  ; 
showing  suffering  as  moral  in  nature,  not  merely  physi- 
cal. But  suffering  in  garden  was  greater  than  at  cruci- 
fixion— throws  light  also  on  mind  of  Jesus  and  gives  im- 
portant examples.  Notice  :  First  trial — in  blood-like 
sweat — was  private.  His  inevitable  anguish  hidden  from 
profane  eyes  of  men  ;  at  cross  he  was  as  a  lamb  led  to 
slaughter. 

Objections  :  1.  Discrepancies  between  Mk.  and  Lk. 
2.  Lack  of  sympathy  in  the  discourse.  S.John  passes  over 
agony  entirely.  4.  Main  Objection  :  Synoptists'  account 
inconsistent  with  John  14-17  chaps,  especially  in  prayer  ; 
not  only  an  impossible  change  of  niood  but  a  falling  from 
state  of  strength  and  majesty  to  one  of  doubt  and  con- 
flict;  hence  either  one  or  both  accounts  not  historical. 
5.  Unnatural  for  Christ  to  deliver  a  long  discourse  at 
such  a  time  and  impossible  for  John  to  remember  it. 
Strauss,  more  consistent  than  the  rest,  considers  it  a  myth, 
and  makes  these  its  stages  :  a.  After  the  Passover,  rev- 
erence of  believers  led  them  to  think  Christ's  sufferings 
were  foreknown  to  him.  6,  He  not  only  foreknew,  but 
had  actually  experienced  them,  c,  Had  also  intended 
them  beforehand.  Ans  :  No  real  difficulty  ;  John  says 
he  speaks  ;  Syn.,  agonizes.  No  change  of  purpose  but  of 
feeling.  Perfection  of  human  nature  would  tend  to 
change  state  of  mind,  while  steadfast  purpose  under  all 
suffering  proves  his  divine  nature. 

Reasoning  of  Rationalists  Suicidal.  They  say  natural 
anguish  at  approaching  death  not  sufficient  to  account 
for  his  intense  suffering.  They  therefore  admit  the  his- 
torical fact  of  the  suffering.  But  this  snfferino;  is  unac- 
countable  except  on  ground  of  union  of  divine  and  human 
in  Christ,  and  his  suffering  for  sin.  As  long  as  history 
stands,  sceptics  are  condemned. 

§143.  Betrayal  and  Arrest.  Jesus,  returning  from  prayer 
the  third  time,  and  finding  the  disciples  asleep,  says 
"  Slefep  on,"  and  yet  adds,  "  Arise."  Sudden  transition 
explained  :  a.  As  only  a  question  :  '•  Sleep  ye  on  still  ?" 
(Gresweil  and  Robinson);  b.  As  ironical  (Calvin,  Meyer) : 
c.  Better  to  suppose  interval  of  time  elapsed  between  the 


(3-'^.<?cii-o-.-^ 


•—iCxi.Jwf   ; 


■f^;     w^-(^/t<-<a.-C/  <^?-^-tir-v-»--<-v    <.^0*-Ua- 


'V^ 


-_'  li?<^tx-<y-0«— -^-v 


.__^.  r^^" 


-^!l<5-^!i-o 


'd^^S^-'l^i-'iL^C-d-^ 


,£2-<^^^ 


yO/l^ihC^^LA^     U  <?-<^-^^ 


-"^^t^yCi^^tyx^ 


ly  ^  c/.^-^.^   ■^<^UX^c<,^'ilyC^     if^^^"^  '>\.^&'  ^A-LA.-^ 


'^T^-t.-ot-^l- 


^ 


/t.Le.-4_.,-c-<-Ajis_£-'e,^^xZ_<9---i..-,.__      ■ 


157 

sentences.  From  his  elevated  position  he  sees  the  ap- 
proaching procession  after  he  spoke  first.  He  then  adds, 
"  Rise,  let  us  be  going."  Mode  of  Betrayal :  As  Christ 
pointed  out  traitor  by  •'  a  aop,"  Judas  points  Him  out 
by  "  a  kiss."  Judas  was  at  work  while  previous  dis- 
course was  going  on.  Priests  still  afraid  of  people,  who 
would  likely  be  about  the  streets  on  Passover  night. 
Judas  directs  the  priests.  Mk.  and  Mt.  say  a  crowd; 
Jno.  a  band  and  leader.  Was  it  a  Temple  watch  of 
Levites,  or  a  Roman  troop?  More  likely  the  latter,  as 
priests  would  get  these  on  the  plea  of  keeping  peace. 
John  says  they  came  with  torches;  3'etit  was  moonlight. 
Ko  inconsistency  because  they  expected  to  search  in 
secret  places.  John  says  Jesus  went  forth  and  said, 
"  Whom  seek  ye?"  They  fell  (0  the  (jround.  Some  regard 
this  as  effect  of  personal  power  of  Jesus  on  their  feelings. 
But  words  show  it  was  miraculous — his  answer  to  their 
display  of  force.  Some  charge  that  it  was  a  theatrical 
display  of  power  which  he  did  not  intend  to  use.  Ans  : 
A  miraculous  evidence  of  divinity  appropriate  to  the 
occasion,  and  served  also  to  shield  the  disciples.  Ques- 
tion  of  harmony  :  John  says  Jesus  immediately  surrender- 
ed ;  Syn.  say  Judas  gave  a  sign.  Some  think  he  surren- 
dered, and  then  Judas,  to  keej)  his  wor(],  gave  the  kiss. 
Judas  may  have  advanced  too  far  bej'ond  his  companions, 
who  could  not  notice  the  kiss,  and  therefore  waited  till 
Jesus  came  forward  and  addressed  them.  Robinson, 
Alford,  &c.,  put  incidents  in  John  18  :  4-9  before  Judas' 
kiss.  More  probable  that  kiss  was  first.  Peter' s  Sword : 
Christ  rebukes  him  and  heals  the  servant.  John  gives 
names.  Syn,  make  Christ  refer  to  cup  of  Gethsemane 
which  John  had  not  related.  Lk.  adds  another  class  of 
persons — priests,  elders  and  captains  of  Temple.  These 
may  have  been  present  from  first  and  taken  no  part,  or 
have  arrived  subsequently.  Flight  of  Disciples  needs 
explanation.  They  could  not  understand  all  the  predic- 
tions. Until  now  they  had  always  seen  Christ  victorious, 
and  seeing  him  make  no  resistance  are  thrown  upon  their 
faith  which  tails  them.  To  understand  their  action, 
must  look  from  their  standpoint.  The  young  man  with 
linen  garment — mentioned  only  by  Mark.  Wh}'  insert 
this  when  so  much  else  of  importance?  Ans:  a,  Inci- 
dent is  a  stroke  of  reality.     When   the  mind    is   aroused 


158 

the  smallest  thin^^  will  strike  it.  Minute  things  confirm 
the  account.  6,  A  familiar  incident  in  court  of  justice. 
Garment  a  common  night  dress,  conspicuous.  It  attracted 
the  men  and  they  seized  it,  when  he  fled  naked,  c^  The 
young  man  was  John  Mark  himself  (Lichtenstein.) 
Omits  name  from  modesty.  This  removes  all  difficulty, 
Likely,  for  his  mother  was  living  in  the  city.  Lange 
thinks  he  owned  the  vineyard  and  had  been  asleep  in  the 
w^atch  tower. 

§144.  Jesus  led  to  Annas.  Difficulties  in  harmony  are 
here  presented,  Jesus  is  led  before  Annas  and  examined 
before  Caiaphas.  Jews  are  under  necessity  for  haste. 
The  arrest  is  contrary  to  law,  and  they  are  afraid  to  hold 
him  prisoner  on  account  of  the  people  and  his  own  mirac- 
ulous power.  While  one  part  engaged  with  Judas, 
another  notifies  the  Sanhedrim.  Their  plan — to  secure 
sentence  of  death  before  an  ecclesiastical  court,  then  as 
matter  of  form  receive  permission  to  execute  it  from  the 
civil  court.  If  Sanhedrim  sentenced  him  on  charge  of 
blasphem}',  the  people  would  be  gained  to  their  side. 
Plan  almost  succeeded,  but  was  made  subservient  to 
foreordained  plan  of  God.  Difference  in  accounts  :  Each 
gospel  has  its  own  plan  ;  Mt.  contrasts  Christ  as  Messiah 
and  King  with  his  rejection  by  the  people;  Mk.  gives 
vivid  descriptions  of  particular  events,  e.  g.,  of  Peter's 
denials;  Lk.,  human  maltreatment  of  Jesus  contrasted 
with  his  dignity  and  love.  So  much  is  recorded  in  the 
different  accounts,  and  each  having  a  difi:'erent  design 
necessitates  differences;  but  a  knowledge  of  all  removes 
all  difficulties.  Three  stages  in  the  ecclesiastical  trial :  1. 
Preliminary  questioning  by  High  Priest.  2.  Trial  before 
Sanhedrim.  3.  The  sentence  and  resolution  to  take  Him 
to  Pilate.  Mt.  and  Mk.  thus  give  the  order:  Before 
Caiaphas,  Peter's  denials.  Sanhedrim  in  morning.  Lk. 
gives;  Peter's  denials,  the  mocking,  the  morning  trial. 
f-N  Jno.  gives  :  Meeting  with  Annas  as  the  first  High  Priest, 
Peter's  first  denial,  examination,  Peter's  denials.  Mt. 
and  Mk.  alike,  except  Mk.  omits  name  of  High  Priest. 
Jesus  is  charged  and  condemned  by  His  own  confession. 
Lk.  differs,  giving  Peter's  denial,  then  the  morning  trial, 
account  of  which  is  almost  same  as  that  given  by  Mt. 
and  Mk.  of  council  and  trial  held  at  night.  1.  Question 
of  Harmony  is  between  Syns.  and  Jno.     Jno,  represents 


^/^l 


159 

Jesus  before  Annas;  Syn.  before  Caiaphas.     Is  Jno.  18: 
13-24  a  preliminary  examination   before  Annas,  cr  only 
before    him   to  be   sent   by  him  to  Caiaphas  ?     Wieseler, 
Tisch.,  Ell.,  Lan^e,  &c.  consider  it  one  examination.    But 
this  difficulty  arises  :  Syn.  say  Peter's  denials  occurred  in 
house  of  Caiaphas,  and  examination  and  denials  were  at 
same  place   at  same  time.     Hence  Meyer  and   Blackie 
consider  this  an  irreconcilable  contradiction.     One  sup- 
position,  however,  removes    all  difficulty  :    Annas    and 
Caiaphas  occupied    same    house.     No  improbability  in 
this.     Annas  was  old  man  and  father-in-law  to  Caiaphas 
(Stier,  Ebrard,  Alford,  &c.)  Solution  :  John's  examination 
was  also  in  house  of  Caiaphas.     «,  John's  form  of  expres- 
sion— gives  long  description   of  Caiaphas,  only  naming 
Annas.     They  led  him  to  Annas  first,  as  father-in-law  to 
Caiaphas.     Again,  John  and  Peter  follow  Jesus;  John 
knowing  the  High  Priest  entered  his  palace,  and  through- 
out describes  the  questioning  as  before  High  Priest,  who 
was  Caiaphas.      Passage  therefore   is   easy   if  we  admit 
that  Annas  sent  Jesus  to  Caiaphas  at  once.     6,  The  de- 
nials of  Peter  are  thus  explained  :  Syn.  and  John  repre- 
sent them  in  hall  of  Caiaphas.     c,  Objections  to  this  view 
an  argument  in  its  favor;  v.  24,  "Now  Annas  had  sent 
him  bound  to  Caiaphas,  the  High  Priest."     In  beginning 
they  took  him  to  Annas.     Natural  then  to  conclude  that 
whatever  occurred  before  v.  24  happened  before  Annus. 
On  the  other  view  the  aorist  aTtsazedev  must  be  translated 
as  a  pluperfect,  "  had  sent ;"  but  no  need  for  forcing  tense 
thus.     Statement  (vs.  24-28)  must  be  taken  parenthetic- 
ally in  connection  with  the  blow  of  the  hand.     He  Was 
bound  and  therefore  defenseless.     Most  harmonists  take 
this  view. 

Preliminary  Examination,  probably  during  interval  be- 
fore Sanhedrim  could  assemble.  Robinson's  plan  adopted, 
though  he  obscures  plan  by  grouping  Peter's  denials  by 
themselves.  Why  should  Jesus  be  taken  before  Annas 
at  all  ?  Because  he  was  father-in-law  to  Caiaphas  and  a 
man  of  influence  and  ability.  In  questioning,  Jesus 
might  show  ground  for  accussng  him.  The  examination 
was  informal.  John  shows  it  to  be  such,  evidently,  what- 
ever view  was  taken.  The  High  Priest's  questions  are 
concerning  his  doctrine  and  disciples  ;  dtdayrj;;  includes 
substance  and  mode  of  teaching.     Christ's  answer,  as  in 


160 

the  garden,  shielils  the  disciples.  His  teaching  had 
always  been  open.  "  Ask  thern  which  heard  me."  He 
disappointed  the  purpose  of  the  High  Priest  and  he  was 
struck  by  an  attendant,  and  onlj'  returned  a  rnild  rebuke. 
Violence  having  commenced,  steadily  increased.  Objec- 
tion to  John's  accowii :  He  omits  examination  of  witnesses 
and  forms  of  trial  as  given  by  Syn.  as  well  as  Christ's 
avowal  of  Messiahship.  Hence  gives  no  issue  to  the  trial. 
Ans:  a,  John  adheres  to  his  sjjjjpjementary  plan.  6, 
Conchision  is  involved  iti  19  ch.,  7  v. :  "  We  have  a  law, 
and  by  our  law  he  ought  to  die."  c.  Charge  of  blasphen^y 
was  not  real  ground  on  which  Caiaphas  consented  to 
crucifixion — but  consent  of  Pilate. 

Peter's  Denials:  In  John,  during  first  examination; 
Mt.  and  Mk.  postpone  them  till  the  formal  trial.  All 
agree  it  was  at  night,  before  cock  crew.  Lk.  therefore 
puts  denials  first,  because  failure  of  the  disciples'  faith  in 
him  was  no  small  element  of  his  sufltering.  John  tells 
how  they  gained  admission  to  the  palace — one  of  them 
being  known  to  the  High  Priest.  They  were  soon  sep- 
arated, Peter  warms  by  the  fire  in  the  court.  First 
Denial:  ISTo  special  difficulty.  Addressed  by  damsel  or 
portress,  whose  attention  was  probably  attracted  at  his 
entrance.  No  one  joined  her  in  her  accusation.  Sicniid 
Denial:  Went  to  tlie  porch  afterwards  when  the  cock 
crew.  Mk.  same  girl  ;  Mt.  anotlier  ;  Lk.  a  man.  John, 
"  they."  Probable  that  portress  addressed  him  again  in 
presence  of  another  maid  who  joined  in — others  repeat 
it.  Third- Denial  :  An  interval  perhaps  of  an  hour  had 
elapsed.  Peter,  to  allay  suspicion,  joins  in  conversation 
and  betrays  his  Galilean  language.  Kir)sman  of  Malchus 
(John)  begins  to  accuse  him,  andisjoined  by  bystanders. 
Charge  now  made  by  so  many,  and  on  good  grounds, 
threatens  immediate  danger,  and^Peter  therefore  denies 
with  oaths.  Cock  crew  about  3  a.  m.  Sceptics  say  eight 
or  nine  denials;  but  the  charges  may  have  been  many, 
with  only  three  denials.  "  Looked  upon  Peter."  Jesus 
was  in  the  large  hall,  Peter  in  the  court  in  sight.  Or  it 
may  have  occurred  as  Jesus  was  passing  from  Annas  to 
Caiaphas.     See  Andrews,  p.  491,  seq. 

§145.  Jesus  before  Sanhedrim.  Mt.  and  Mk.  put  meet- 
ing of  Sanhedrim  and  condemnation  before  Peter's  deni- 
als, as  if  at  night,  and  distinguish  a  reassembling  in  the 


^^ytaiUy^-^--  r^-^^-^--^-^    ^Ui^lyy^    ^-^-^^-^  ^<lJ^  j^-r-  C 


OUL 


idjAA^^Y^iy-^  ^j  0^<JL  M/^-e^i^c  '2^ 


161 

morning.  Lk.  speaks  of  no  night  meeting  but  records 
all  as  happening  in  the  morning.  Is  examination  in  Lk. 
22:  66-71  different  from  Mt.  26:  57,  58,  or  is  Luke's 
simply  a  fuller  report  of  a  second  morning  examination 
recorded  in  Mt.  27  :  1  ?  Or  is  the  last  the  same  meeting, 
and  therefore  Mt.  and  Mk.'s  accounts  are  to  be  transfer- 
red to  the  morning?  Sceptics  sa}'  they  are  irreconcila- 
ble. Most  orthodox  interpreters  resort  to  the  harmony, 
1.  The  simplest  method  is  to  consider  that  Mt.  and  Mk. 
describe  a  different  meeting  from  Lk.  (Lange  and  An- 
drews). The  order  then  is:  Christ  taken  from  Annas 
and  sent  immediately  to  Caiaphas.  who,  while  Sanhedrim 
is  convening,  questions  Christ — then  Peter's  denials 
begin.  Sanhedrim  opens — trial  goes  on — mockery  &c. — 
in  the  morning  a  formal  session  of  Sanhedrim  wliose  same 
questions  are  repeated  and  a  charge  of  blasphemy  brought. 
Christ  sent  to  Pilate.  This  ordei-  has  its  plausibilities  : 
a.  It  keeps  each  account  in  its  own  order,  Mt.  27  :  1,  Mk. 
15  :  1  agree  with  Lk.  22 :  ^^  a-^  to  time.  h.  The  order  of 
time  favors  it,  "-  When  it  was  day."  Mk.  is  still  stronger 
— zvdzioq,  ;  Mt.  and  Lk.  saj'  early  dawn.  Lk.'s  examina- 
tion in  the  morning  is  parallel  with  what  Mt.  and  Mk. 
say  was  early  in  the  morning;  natural  impression  from 
Mt.  and  Mk.  is  that  trial  was  at  night,  c.  Certain  differ- 
ences in  the  accounts  imply  two  different  meetings.  In 
Lk.  no  fornjalities,  no  witness  given.  "  Art  thou  the 
Christ,"  as  if  question  was  rei;)eated,  and  designed  to 
leave  no  doubt  in  any  mind  that  Christ  really  claimed  to 
be  such.  This  was  the  more  necessary  if  morning  meet- 
ing was  fuller  and  more  formal,  d.  Jewish  authorities 
affirm  that  it  was  illegal  to  try  any  case  at  night  or  pass 
sentence  on  same  day  as  trial,  e.  The  buffeting  and 
mocking  which  Lk.  records  before  morning  session  is 
likely  same  as  Mt.  and  Mk.  record  at  night,  Robinson 
thinks  they  w^ere  repeated — difficult  to  suppose  however. 
/.  Andrews,  &c.,  argue  that  morning  session  was  in  a  dif- 
ferent place  from  the  informal  one  at  night.  Lk.  says 
they  brought  him  to  their  own  Council  Chamber:  the 
trial  therefore  in  the  house  of  High  Priest  is  different 
from  that  in  the  Council  Chamber.  The  Council  Chamber 
of  Sanhedrim — connected  with  the  Temple  enclosure. 
They  were  driven  out  of  the  place  a  year  before  the  cru- 
cifixion, and  held  their  session  in  shops.     Argument  for 


162 

plan  is  doubtful.  2.  Robinson,  EUicott,  Alford,  iVlejer, 
Lichtenstein  maintain  that  Mt.  and  Mk.  are  parallel  with 
Lk. — only  one  trial,  and  that  in  morning.  Main  Reason 
for  this  view:  the  question  in  Lk.  is  so  much  like  that 
in  Mt.  and  Mk.,  it  is  not  necessar}-  to  suppose  it  was  re- 
peated. The  order  then  is  :  From  Annas  to  Caiaphas — 
preliminary  questions  before  Caiaphas  when  n\orning 
comes.  Objecdons  to  this  view  :  a.  Mt.  and  Mk.  speak  of 
presence  of  Sanhedrim  in  house  of  Caiaphas,  when  Jesus 
first  arrives  there;  Robinson  assumes  that  they  mention 
this  by  anticipation,  h.  Mr.  and  Mk.  transpose  the  denials 
of  Peter,  puttin«'  them  <ifh'r  the  trial,  whereas  they  ln\p- 
pcned  during  the  night  and  daring  the  trial.  <\  Mt.  27  :  1 
and  Mk.  15  :  1  seem  to  imply  a  night  and  moiMiiiig  meet- 
ing. Some  say  not  mean  a  new  meeting;  l)ut  only  a  re- 
sumption of  the  nari'ative  interru[)ted  by  mention  of 
denial.  Others  suppose  Matt.  27  :  1  was  simph-  a  private 
caucus  of  mend)ers.  This  method  yields  a  perfectly  good 
and  historically  true  narrative.  The- only  historical  dif- 
ference between  the  two  views  is  :  Adoption  of  a  trial 
by  night  would  prove  an  unseemly  iiaste  on  part  of  priests 
to  carry  out  their  design  so  early  in  morning. 
^-^  1.  he  Trial*  Was  the  court  legally  constituted  and  the 
trial  fair  ?  Salvadcn-  (Institt.  de  Moise)  views  tlie  trial 
from  a  Jewish  standpoint.  Answered  by  Dupin.  i'hilip- 
son,  that  all  was  done  by  the  Romans.  Comp.  Friedlieb. 
Jews  claim  Christ  was  an  imposte;,  and  that  the  trial 
should  be  judged  from  their  point  of  view.  False  claim. 
Peter  at  Pentecost  puts  it  in  proper  light — done  by  "  law- 
less hands,"  (Acts  2:  23),  "  through  ignorance"  (Acts  3: 
17).  Even  granting  JewisTi  claim,  the  trial  of  Christ 
was  neither  fair  nor  legal. 

1.  It  was  prejudged.  Since  previous  Passover,  Jews 
"  sought  to  kill  him"  (John  7  :  1).  After  raising  of  Laz- 
arus a  fornnil  council  and  plot  to  put  him  to  death  (John 
11:  47-53).     Did  not  now  design  to  give  him  fair  trial. 

2.  The  charge  befoi-e  Pilate  not  the  real  ground  of 
their  })ersecution.  His  gathering  men  for  a  spiritual 
kingdom  \yould  distract  attention  from  resisting  tlie 
R(,)mans,  yet  they  represent  to  Pilate  that  he  is  plotting 
against  Csesar  (Lk.  23  :  2).  Their  cliarge  of  blasphemy 
(John  19  :  7)  founded  on  an  admission  forced  b^'  Pligh 
Priest  during  the  trial.  Real  ground  is  political  jealousy. 
They  fear  the  influence  of  his  doctrines. 


7h 


r</2M 


^''^^^  -<^^^aZ  ,  Cc^/^a^   C\^:^^ju    cic:^n..,^%    Q^,..w._o^ 


168 

3.  It  was  conducted  in  haste  and  in  ornelty,  (tlins 
against  their  own  law.  "They  sp-it  in  his  face;  they 
smote  him  with  rods;  they  struck  him  with  closed  fists 
and  with  their  open  palms."  (Farrar.)  At  same  time, 
it  was  a  representative,  national  act;  jurisdiction  belonged 
to  Sanhedrim.  The  legal  form  ot  obtaining  witnesses 
was  obeyed.  This  necessary  because  of  Romans  (John 
18  :  31)  and  because  people  were  in  his  favor.  The 
chief  priests  and  Sanhedrim  "  sought  false  witness." 
When  before  High  Priest,  there  were  no  witnesses. 
Christ  then  appealed  to  publicity  of  his  ministry  and 
demanded  witnesses  (John  18  :  19-23).  They  must, 
therefore,  obtain  true  testimony,  yet  apply  it  against 
Christ.  This  is  difficult.  At  last,  two  bear  witness: 
"  This  fellow  said,  '  I  am  able  to  destroy  the  temple  of 
God  and  to  build  it  in  three  days.'  "  Falsity  lay  in  their 
application — wresting  his  meaning.  Yet  not  even  so 
was  their  witness  Xaq  {Mk.  14:59).  Difficult  to  prove 
Christ  claimed  to  be  Messiah.  Some  say,  strange,  since 
Christ  had  publicly  claimed  Messiahship  and  divinity. 
Ans  :  His  mode  of  teaching  was  nevertheless  enigmati- 
cal. Most  take  la^  to  mean  witnesses  not  agree  [so  E.  V.) 
Law  required  at  least  two  (Deut.  17:  6).  Sanhedrim  in 
a  dilemma  :  will  not  acquit,  cannot  condemn.  This 
equivalent  to  a  confession  of  his  innocence.  Even  this 
semblance  of  a  trial  writes  their  own  accusation.  Notice 
the  facts  of  his  life,  miracles,  doing  good,  etc.,  not  denied. 
In  charge  concerning  temple,  possibly  they  thought  a 
claim  to  divinity  or  threat  against  temple  involved.  So 
high  priest:  "  Answerest thou  nothing  ?"  "  But  he  held 
his  peace."  Farrar  contrasts  with  trial  of  Herod  before 
Sanhedrim  (Jos.  Ant.  Bk.  14  :  9 :  4.) 

Why  Christ  maices  no  reply  ?  Before  High  Priest,  in 
private,  and  before  Pilate,  a  heathen,  Christ  answers. 
To  false  witness  now,  he  answers  not  a  word.  Strauss 
finds  in  this  silence  a  myth  founded  on  Is.  53  :  7,  "  As  a 
sheep  before  her  shearers  is  dumb,  etc."  Reasons  for 
silence : 

1.  Their  testimony  proved  nothing,  and  was  confuted 
by  their  disagreement. 

2.  They  would  not  believe,  bad  he  answered. 

3.  Not  his  design  to  be  acquitted.  A  voluntary  sacri- 
fice. 


164 

4.  Silence  tliwarts  them  and  brings  out  his  dignity 
and  resignation.  "  They  felt  before  that  silence  as  if  they 
were  the  culprits — he  thejudge." 

Priests  now  change  plan  :  would  make  Christ  condemn 
himself — illegal.  Excited  High  Priest  stands  :  "  Answer- 
est  thou  nothing?"  Adjures  him,  "  Art  thou  the  Christ, 
the  Son  of  God'?  (Mt.  26  :  63)  the  Son  of  the  Blessed  ?" 
(Mk.  14:  61.)  Does  "Son  of  God  "  here  imply  idea  of 
divinity — or  is  it  simply  a  Messianic  title. 

In  favor  of  latter  view  :  1.  "  Son  of  God  "  one  of 
current  titles  of  the  Messiah,  based  on  Ps.  2  :  7,  not  im- 
plying divinity.  Idea  of  divine  nature  of  Messiah  lost 
among  Jews. 

2.  In  his  answer  Christ  puts  another  Messianic  title 
over  against  this—"  Son  of  Man,"  based  on  Dan.  7  :  13. 
Held  by  Meyer  and  Gess. 

In  favor  of  former  :  1.  Christ  had  used  it  as  implying 
divinity,  and  they  so  understood  him.  (John  5  :  18  ;  10  : 
36.) 

2.  This  accounts  for  their  rage.  Mere  claim  of  .Mes- 
siahship  does  not  account  for  it.  Rage  because,  a,  priv- 
ileges to  be  taken  away,  and  6,  Jesus  claimed  to  be  the 
"  Son  of  God."  Form  of  question  makes  tlie  distinction 
— adjures  him  "  by  the  living  God." 

3.  This  accounts  for  charge  of  blasphemy — not  so 
other  views.  Mt.  26 :  65,  27  :  40,  John  19  :  7  show  their 
ground  of  accusation  was  in  this  title. 

Christ  answers,  in  this  decisive,  tragic  moment,  the 
oidy  time  when  silence  might  have  saved  him  :  "I  am, 
and  hereafter  ye  shall  see  the  Son  of  Man,  etc."  (Matt. 
26  :  64,  -h  sctto.^.)  Comp.  Dan.  7  :  13.  Some  refer  words 
to  last  judgment.  Yet  dTzafne  (from  now  on)  would 
appear  to  refer  to  spiritual  kingdom.  Whatever  the 
exegesis,  Christ's  design  appears  two-fold.  1.  To  assert 
his  divinit}'.  2.  To  warn  his  enemies.,  "Jesus  simply 
intends  to  indicate  the  point  of  his  deepest  humiliation 
as  the  turning  point  between  his  redeeming  work  and  that 
of  judgment,  and  to  declare  that  at  the  very  period  when 
they  thought  to  destro}'  him,  histrue  glory  would  begin." 
(Ebrard.)  TsTote,  this  the  fixst  public  assumption  of  title, 
Messiah.  Had  before  revealed  it  to  woman  of  Samaria 
(John  4  :  26) ;  to  disciples  at  Cfesarea  Philippi  (Matt.  16  : 
20);  cautions  disciples  to  tell  no  man.     His  claim  to  be 


/^^.^x^  c<,^(^    ^^^t^i^.;'<^^i>---'    t^Cf-i^^^'v  fiAytU^r 


-1 


165 

"  Sou  of  God  "  always  aroused  violeneo,  e.  2j.,  at  the  feast 
of  the  Jews  (John  s":  17,18)  :  in  Galilee  (Jo1in  6:  40,  41  ; 
at  Dedication  (John  10  :  30,  31)  :  Jews  not  sure  he  is  the 
Christ    (John  10:  24.)      Now    first   asserted    before    his 
enemies,  when  he  intends  to  abide  consequences.  Culmi- 
nates in  a  long  conflict  between  him  and  the  priests  who 
would  have  accepted  him  had  he  accommodated  himself 
to  their  views  of  Messiah.      Effect :  1.   His^h   Priest  rent^ 
his  clothes,  forbidden  by  Lev.  10  :  6  and  21  :  10.      Farrar 
says  :     "  But  Jewish  H'dwha  considered  it  lawful  in  case 
of  blasphemy  (1  Mace.  11  :  71  ;   Jos.  B.  J.  2:  15  :  4.")  2. 
All  vote  him  "  worthy  of  death."     From  Lk.  23  :  51  sjrae 
except  J()se[)h  of  Arimathea  from   C^onncil.     Saj'  he  was 
not  called.     Probably  both  he  and  Nicodemua  present. 
Even  small  minoritiesmay  be  riijht.     3.  Buffet  and  mock 
him.     They  "  struck  him  in  the  fac  o,'*  •'  spit  in  his  face," 
"  smote  him  with  the  palms  of  their  hands,  sayino;  Pro- 
phesy, etc."     Does  this    occur  twice.     Robinson,  Grass- 
well  say  once.      Probably  parallel  :     1.  Improbable  Luke 
would   represent   violence   occurrintr   in    resfular    court. 
2.   Position  in   narrative  explained    by    contrast  of  men 
mocking,  with  Peter  weepincr  bitterly.      By  whom  ?   Mt. 
sa^-s  indefinitely,  "  they;"    Mk.  says  "some  ;"  Lk.,  "  the 
men  that  held  Jesus."     Inference  that  Sanhedrim  did  it 
first,  and    Roman  officers   or   soldiers    followed  their  ex- 
ample.    »J«ws  reject  this  interpretation.     Where  occur? 
Some  say    in  prison  ;    Laii^  in    guard  room    of   priest's 
house.     The-^e  are  only  guesses.     Strauss  says  mockerv 

a  myth  founded  on  Is.  53,  "  braised  for  their  inirpiities,   . 

etc."  (^ 

§146.  Morning  Meefhifi  of  Sanlmlrim.  (Lk.  22:66-71.) 
On  Friday  15th  Nisan,  \Vieseler,  Lange,  Robinson  ;  14th 
Nisan,  Bleek.  Was  this  an  informal  consultation,  or  a 
Continuation  of  night  session  ?  Or  was  all  by  daylight, 
or  a  new  meeting  very  early  ?  In  our  view  a  new  meet- 
ing for  three-fold  purpose  :  1.  To  convince  bystanders. 
2.  The  Oral  Law  ordained  trial  by  daylight,  Zohar  56. 
Farrar:  "  And  they  who  could  trample  on  all  justice 
and  all  mercy  were  yet  scrupulous  about  the  infinitely 
little." 

3,  T«  consult  how  to  put  him  to  death.  Farrar: 
"  His  3d  actual  but  His  first  formal  and  legal  trial,"  and 
in  a  note — "It  is  only  by  courtesy  that  this  body  can  be 


166 

regarded  as  a  Sanhedrim  at  all.  Jost.  observes  that  there 
is  in  the  Romish  period  no  traces  of  any  genuine  legal 
Sanhedrim,  apart  from  mere  special  incompetent  gather- 
ings. (See  Jos.  Ant.  XX.  9.  §1  :  B.  J.  IV.  5,  §4.)/'  The 
question  "  Art  thou  the  Christ  ?"  and  his  answers  read 
as  though  reff  rring  to  a  former  trial.  Then  they  "  bound 
him  "  and  led  him  to  Pilate,  a  transfer  from  eeclesiastica! 
to  civil  court.  Their  evidence  of  his  Messianic  claim 
established.  Strauss  retains  trial,  on  charge  of  over- 
throw of  existing  institutions,  and  condemnation  for 
claim  to  be  Messiah.  Some  Jews  maintain  that  as  they 
had  not  power  of  life  and  death,  responsibility  rests  on 
/Romans. 

§151.  Judas  hangs  hirpself  (Mt.  27:  3-10,  Acts  1 :  18, 
19).  Robinson  transposes  suicide  till  Christ  was  given 
up  to  be  crucified.  "  Till  then  he  had  hoped,  perhaps, 
to  enjoy  the  reward  of  his  treachery,  without  involving 
himself  i"  the  guilt  of  his  master's  olood.  Mt.  places  it 
here.  Better  to  follow  order  ot  Evang.  till  proof  to  con- 
trary. Introduced  as  showing  by  striking  example  the 
effect  of  ill-treating  Christ ;  also  brought  by  Mt.  in  con- 
trast with  re[)entance  (.)f  Peter.  Another  testimony  to 
innocence  ot  Christ  (Mt.  27:  4.)  Lange,  as  symbolical 
of  the  suicide  of  tlie  nation.  Theory  that  condemnation 
of  Christ  took  Juiias  by  surprise  inconsistent  with  spirit 
of  his  own  confession  (v.  4)  and  every  fact  of  case. 

Casts  money  in  the  Ploly  Place,  where  he  l)ad  no  right 
to  enter — intent  to  return  it  to  them.  Significant  that 
blood-money  returns  to  Temple,  Christ's  body.  Differ- 
ences: 1.  Mt.  says  ''hanged  Ijimself" — Peter  (Acts  1: 
18)  "falling  headlong,  he  burst  asundoi- "— not  incon- 
sistent if  he  hanged  iiimself  and  rope  or  branch  broke. 

2.  Mt.  says  "priests  bought." — Peter:  "Now  tlu^ 
man  purchased  a  field."  Farrar  :  "  There  is  in  a  great 
crime  an  awful  illuminating  power.  In  Judas  as  in  so 
many  thousands  before  and  since  this  opening  of  the  eyes 
which  followed  the  consummation  of  an  awful  sin  to 
which  many  other  sins  have  led,  drove  him  from  remorse 
to  despair,  from  despair  to  murder,  from  u)urder  to 
suicide."  Robinson  "In  Acts  1:  18  ixr/jaazo  is  to  be  ren- 
dered :  he  gave  occasion  to  jiurchase.  Analogous  t*j  Mt. 
27:  60;  John  3 :  22  ;  4:2,  etc." 


f^'^^c^-dJl^.c^c^j^r^ 


1  ^^.ju^^^.^^^     6ts^-Ci.^<X^ 

5  -i--,-^  -^uJL^^^  l^    oUloJzL- 


/M^-^U^  ^>xA,.d-yT/  ^SA^ixjz-^  -Ctj>^'^^  <>Mi!UvO  H-y^  c^-thpUaj  ,ph 


^LL..t£j>  vw..^^  y.^.^.^^ -^  (t^c/  fe  f^-cfc* 


167 

§146.  (resumed.)  Jesus  before  PUaic.  Had  Sanhedrim 
tlie  power  of  life  and  death  ?     No. 

1.  Distinctly  stated  in  John  18  :  31  and  confirmed  by 
Talmud  (Berachoth  f.  58:  1— see  Buxtorf  Lex.  Tal.  p. 
514.) 

2.  Im[)OSsible  that  the  Romans  would  leave  them 
such  power. 

3.  Accounts  best  for  anxiety  to  procure  Pilate's  con- 
sent. 

Dollin2:er  thinks  they  had  this  jjower  but  could  not 
[lur  to  death  at  feast  time.  Objection  :  Sanhedrim 
stoned  Steplien.  This,  however,  was  the  tumultuous  act 
of  a  mob.  Paul  atter  being  tried  by  Sanhedrim  was  sent 
to  Rome.  Two  results  accomplished  by  Providence  : 
1.  Christ's  death  by  crucifixion  (John  18  :  32.)  2.  Par- 
ticipation by  Gentiles. 

Pilate  was  fifth  Procurator  of  Judea  wliich  was  a 
hard  country  to  govern.  Not  under  Questor,  nor 
was  it  a  proconsnhir  or  imperial  province.  Pilate  in- 
sulted the  Jews,  a.  by  removing  army  and  images  from 
Csesarea  to  Jerusalem  (Jos.  Ant.  18:  3,  §1.)  b.  By  ex- 
pending sacred  money — Corban — on  aqueducts  (Jos.  B. 
J.  2  :  9^  §4).  c.  By  setting  up  in  Jerusalem  shields  dedi- 
cated to  Tiberius^Pliiio.  Legat.  ad  Caium  §38)  (/.  By 
mingling  the  blood  of  Gableans  with  their  sacrifices  (Lk. 
13[:1)  Rennned  A.  D.  36  (same  year  as  Caiaphas),  by 
Vitellius,  Le'..:ate  of  Syria,  on  accusation  of  Samaritans 
for  iiaving  slain  many  while  assembled  on  Mt.  Gerizim 
(Jos.  Ant.  18:  4,  §§1,  2).  Eusel)ius  says,  wearied  with 
misfortunes,  he  killed  himself.  Traditions:  1.  Banished 
to  Vienna  Allobrogum,  where  there  is  a  pyramid  called 
Pontius  Pilate's  tomb.  2.  At  Mt.  Pilatu-  by  the  lake  of 
Lucerne,  plunged  into  dismal  lake  at  the  summit.  (See 
Smith's  Diet.)'' 

Has  strong  conviction  of  innocence  of  Jesus  and  en- 
deavors to  free  him.  He  is  impressed  by  Christ's  claim 
to  be  the  Son  of  God,  and  by  his  wife's  dream.  Pilate 
is  perplexed  by  the  Priests  accusing,  while  the  people 
are  favoring  Christ.  His  great  fault  is  cowardice.  He 
acted  from  policy  and  not  from  priiiciple  "(Chrysos). 
Collateral  evidence  in  Tacitus  Ann.  15  :  44;  Per  pro- 
curaiorem  Pontium  Pilatum  suppUcio  aff'ectus  erai.^'  Also 
known  from  Justin,  Tert.,  Euseb.,  that  Pilate    made    re- 


168 

port  to  Tiberius  (of  Christ's  trial  and  condemnation), 
which  is  lost.     "  Acta  Pilati "  now  extant,  spurious. 

Accusation  of  Sanhedrim.  Still  early  when  they  lead 
Christ  to  the  Prsetoriuni,  whicli  is  generally  understood 
to  be  the  white  marble  palace  of  Herod ;  by  some 
(Ewald,  Meyer,  Lange),  the  tower  of  Antonia.  In  John 
19 :  13,  '•  the  Pavemeut,"  outside  of  the  Prpetorium. 
Bears  on  direction  of  Via  Dolor'>sa.  Jews  did  not  enter 
Prsetoriurn  lest  they  should  be  polluted  for  Passover. 
John  18:  28,  not  [.roof  it  was  Nisan  14th.  So  Pilate 
goes  out  to  them.  Synoptists  give  general  description; 
John  gives  conversati(U)  between  Pilate  and  the  Priests, 
also  between  Pilate  and  Je^us.  Farrar :  "  The  last  trial 
is  full  of  passion  and  movement :  it  involves  a  threefold 
change  of  scene,  a  threefold  accusation,  a  threefold 
acquittal  by  the  Romans,  a  threefold  rejection  by  tlie 
Jews,  a  threefold  warning  to  Pilate  and  a  threefold  effort 
on  his  part,  made  with  ever  increasing  energy  and  ever 
deepening  agitation,  to  baffle  the  accusers  and  to  set  the 
victim  free." 

Pilate  and  the  Priests  First  attempt  is  to  obtain  as  a 
favor  crucifixion  of  Christ.  Charge  of  blaspheiuy 
against  God  notsufficient  before  heathen  Pilate,  and  they 
had  no  other.  "What  accusation  bring  ye?"  If  he 
were  not  a  malefactor  etc.,  implies  guilty  of  no  ordinary 
crime.  Pilate  is  sarcastic;  ''take  ye  him  and  judge 
him."  If  you  condemn,  you  must  bear  the  responsibil- 
ity. I  execute,  when  I  judge.  Jews  say  "•  not  lawful 
for  us."  Then  began  they  to  accuse  him  (Lk.  28:  2  be- 
tween John  18  :  32  and  v.  33)  of  perverting  the  nation, 
forbidding  tribute,  and  claiming  to  be  king.  Notice:  1. 
Not  same  charge  as  before  Sanliedrim.  2.  Charge  false 
in  fact.  They  knew  Christ  taught  submission  to  the 
government.  3.  Ignominious,  as  Priests  advocate  that 
for  which  they  condemned  Christ. 

Pilate  and  Jesus  go  within  the  Prpetorium.  Pilate  did 
not  trust  the  Jews;  knew  they  would  not  condemn 
Christ  for  treason  against  the  Romans, — endeavors,  ac- 
cording to  Roman  law,  to  obtain  confession  of  accused. 
Synoptists  give  affirmation.  John  fuller  :  "  Art  thou 
a  king  then  ?  "  Could  not  say  "no."  Pilate  might  not 
understand  "  yes."  Reply  :  "  Sayest  thou  this  of  thy- 
self?"    Design  :  Hengst.,  Stier,  to  arouse  Pihite's   con- 


\^<.^'C^xM^  -^x>ty^J^-AJ   L,^--X<b  -^Ua>v^  ,(LA>^^v\^(^^/<i5CA.^vA>i/(\     yL^— — 


OJuUj^e  '^   -^-^S^-^--^ 


.^Ce^jx^^J     ^    iLUjJ ^Y^-^^-"^^  ■ 


0 


169 

science.  Meyer,  Christ  demands  who  is  his  accuser. 
Olsh.,  Lange,  to  bring  out  sense  in  which  Christ  put  the 
question.  Jesus  makes  clear  that  his  kingdom  is  not  of 
this  world.  Pihite,  "thou  art  a  king  then?"  deprecating 
accent  on  then.  Ans:  "Thou  sayest  it  .  .  .  every 
one  that  is  of  the  truth  heareth  my  voice."  Pilate's 
famous  question,  "  What  is  truth  ?"  Whether  in  earnest 
(Chrysos.),  impatient  (Farrar),  contemptuous  (Meyer), 
skeptical,  or  indifferent,  Pilate  gives  additional  testimony 
to  the  innocence  of  Christ:  "I  find  in  him  no  fault 
at  all." 

Priests  enraged  make  new  chrages.  He  stirreth  up 
the  people,  beginning  from  Galilee  (Lk.  23:5).  Pilate 
hearing  the  word  Galilee,  eagerly  dismisses  him  to  Herod. 
Second  effort  to  release  Jesus. 

Objections:  1.  Synoptists  give  Pilate's  question  to 
Jesus,  rt6' {>' outside;  John  says  in  the  Prfetorium.  Ans: 
Synoptists  give  genei'al  account,  do  not  say  \twas  outside. 
No  contradiction.  2.  How  did  John  know  private  inter- 
view ?  Ans:  He  was  present,  or  Pilate  reported,  or 
Jesus  stood  at  the  door  and  all  heard,  or  some  prosecutor 
was  voluntarily  within.  Strauss,  all  an  invention  of 
John.  Baur  finds  a  tendency  of  Evangelist  to  throw  guilt 
on  Jews.  3.  The  narratives  separately  unintelligible. 
Ace.  to  John,  Pilate's  questions  to  Jesus  before  accusa- 
tion. Ans  :  John  assumes  possession  of  Synoptists — 
— also,  Pilate  knew  much  of  Jesus.  Whole  city  in  ex- 
citement. In  Synoptists,  Jews  accuse,  Jesus  admits  and 
without  investigation  (mentioned  by  John),' Pilate  pro- 
nounces liim  innocent.  John  supplements  not  contra- 
dicts. 

§147.  Jesus  before  Herod.  (Lk.  23  :  6-12).  Priests 
disappointed.  Pilate  sends  Christ  to  Herod  :  1.  To  get 
rid  of  a  troublesome  case.  To  keep  from  ofi'"iiding  the 
priests.  Other  motives  subordinate.  Herod  Antipas, 
tetrarch  of  Galilee,  was  in  Jerusalem  to  keep  the  Pass- 
over. Receives  Jesus  with  curiosity.  A  frivolous,  un- 
scrupulous, dissolute  monarch,  sensuous  and  murcurial 
in  character,  susceptible  of  religious  impressions,  unwill- 
ing to  renounce  sins.  Shows  no  appreciation  of  the 
case  ;  hoped  to  see  a  miracle.  Had  Christ  worked  one 
miracle  here  or  before  Pilate  he  might  have  caused  his 
release.     Reserve  of  Christ   sublime,     Herod    is  disap- 


170 

pointed  and  sends  Jesns  back  with  scorn.  Jndas,  Priests, 
Pilate  and  Herod  all  testify  to  his  innocence.  He  is 
mocked  and  arrayed  in  cloak.  Color?  lap.7Z(i6.v — bright. 
If  white,  means  innocence  or  a  candidate  for  ofHce  :  if 
red.  royalty.  Probably  red  military  robe.  Shows  mock- 
ery.' Fnltillment  of  Ps.  2.  (See  Acts  4  :  26-27).  Herod 
and  Pilate  made  friends.  Enmity  probably  because  of 
Galileans  slain  (Lk.  13  :  1).  Wliere  Herod  lodg-ed  doubt- 
ful ;  probably  in  old  Herod  Palace,  Pilate  in  the  new. 
Objections:  1.  Why  was  Jesus  sent  back  ?  Ans  :  Olsh., 
because  birth  in  Bethlehem  was  ascertained.  More 
likely,  could  not  find  ground  to  condemn  him,  would  not 
oppose  Priests  by  acquitting,  so  preferred  to  return 
Pilate's  compliment.  2.  Why  mentioned  by  Luke  only? 
Strauss,  because  it  neyer  happened.  Ans  :  Not  essential 
to  history,  ^o  effect  except  additional  humiliation  and 
new  testimony  to  innocence. 

§148.  Pilate' s  third  e fort  to  release  Jesiis.  (Mt.  27:  15- 
26;  Mk.  15:  6-15:  Lk.  23:  13-25;  John  18:39,40). 
Synuptists  full.  .John  two  yerses.  Mt.  and  Mk.  contrast 
Jesus  and  Barabbas.  Pilate  proposes  to  chastise  and  re- 
lease him;  a  compromise  between  sense  of  justice  and 
fear  of  insurrection.  Not  succeeding,  proposes  to  release 
a  criminal,  according  to  custom  at  Passover.  People, 
influenced  by  Priests'(Mt.  27:  20),  denjanded  Barabbas. 
Pilate  had  been  warned  by  misgivings  of  conscience. 
Now  a  second  solemn  warning  in  the  dream  of  his  wife. 
Again  urges  release;  failing,  he  yields  him  to  be  cruci- 
fied. Notice,  Pilate  comes  out  and  takes  a  seat  on  the 
bench  (Mt.  27  :  19)  in  a  place  called  "  Pa.vement,"  Gab- 
batha  (John  i94^)r 3  probably,  portable,  mosaic  pave- 
ment (Cfesar  carried  one)  in  definite  locality  Gahbatha. 
Where  ?  Lightfoot,  outer  court  of  Temple,  i.  e.  of  Gen- 
tiles. Common  opinion — open  space  before  Prffitorium. 
Not  secret,  examined  in  their  presence ;  acquits  him 
fully.  If  innocent  why  punish?  May  have  thought 
him  worthy  of  some  punishment,  and  wished  to  please 
the  Priests.  Now  proposes  to  treat  him  as  guilty — fatal 
step.  Expects  support  of  the  people  to  release  him  but 
is  disappointed.  No  custom  known  of  releasing  at  feast. 
Originated  probably  with  Pilate.  Ewald,  to  commem- 
orate deliverance  from  Egypt;  others,  an  allusion  to 
scape-goat.    Not  so;  scape-goat  referred  to  Christ.     Was 


qJ  /i^coIqaJ  ^^f^^,,^,,^.,,^ 


^    -^^^^^-v^.    ^-^^ 


Ax 


.Z^fLt.     ^"^-e- 


7, 


Jh 


/ 


•  ^>^<^   Li-a-^K  ^0 


171 

Barabbas  mentioned  first  by  Pilate  (Mt.  27:  17),  or  by 
people  (Lk.  23:  18)?  Ans:  By  Pilate,  as  Mt.  is  most 
specific.  People  choose.  Note  1.  Barabbas  guilty  of 
crime  charged  against  Christ.  2.  Hypocrisy  of  Priests 
confessed  in  choice  of  Barabbas,  a  murderer,  political 
and  social  disturber.  3.  Christ's  purity  in  strong  con- 
trast. 

Barabbas  probably  a  zealot,  making  insurrection 
against  the  government.  Name — Son  of  the  father, 
dish,  supposes  he  was  a  false  Messiah.  Syriac  version 
reads  Jesus — Barabbas,  which  reading  is  adopted  by 
Tisch.,  Meyer  and  Schafi".  Accounted  for  by  supposi- 
tion that  he  was  pseudo  Messiah;  rejected  by  Lachm. 
Treg.  Popular  mind  changed  ;  now  demands  Barabbas. 
Meanwhile  cotnes  message  from  Pilate's  wife  (Claudia 
canonized  by  Greek  Church).  A  disturbing  morning 
dream  (ar^usnov).  Some  say  suggested  by  God's  spirit ; 
others,  by  Devil  to  avert  crucifixion  because  of  conse- 
quences. Bible  does  not  attribute  foreknowledge  to  Satan. 
Proves  Pilate  not  unimpressible.  Pilate  remonstrates, 
but  is  overborne  by  the  tumult.  The  voice  of  the  peo- 
ple and  the  chief  priests  prevailed.  Choice  of  people 
renders  rejection  of  Clirist  national.  How  account  for 
change  of  popular  mind  towards  Jesus?  a.  People  at 
entrance  to  Jerusalem  mostly  Galileans,  now  Jerusalem- 
ites.  Inadequate  reason  as  from  narrative  we  infer  that 
people  as  a  whole  do  both.  b.  Hatred  of  Romans,  and 
unpopularity  of  Pilate.  People  side  with  their  own 
priests.  c.  Christ  now  convicted  of  blasphemy.  d. 
Fundamental  reason,  disappointment'l)f  Missianic  hopes. 
At  Christ's  entrance,  looked  for  external  kingdom.  Now 
humiliated,  condemned,  mocked.  Might  defend  himself 
by  n:>iracles  but  refuses.  His  own  disciples  forsook  him 
and  fled.  While  this  explains,  it  is  no  excuse  for  their 
conduct.  Nothing  can  wipe  away  the  stigma,  the  great 
sin  of  the  world  by  vox  populi. 

Why  did  they  cry  "  crucify,"  when  this  was  not  a  Jew- 
ish mode  ?  J.  A.  A.:  Jesus  was  substituted  for  Barab- 
bas, who  was  to  be  crucified.  It  was  simply  because  they 
expected  the  Romans  to  perform  it.  They  thus  de- 
nationalized themselves.  Handwashing  by  Pilate,  given 
only  in  Mt.  27:  24.  Andrews  transposes  to  John  19:  15 
(§150).     Tisch.  and  Rob.  follow  Mt's  order.     Objected  to 


172 

as  Jewish  practice  (Deut.  21  :  6-9).  Ans:  Also  lieathen 
(vide.  Livy  37  :  3,  Ov.  Fast.  II.  45);  a  natural  symbolic 
act,  evidence  of  Pilate's  inner  convictions. 

Compare  words  of  Judas  and  Pilate.  Judas:  "I  have 
betrayed  the  innocent  blood."  Priests.  "  See  thou  to 
that."  Pilate:  "I  am  innocent  of  the  blood  of  this  just 
person  :  see  ye  to  it."  Then  the  terrible  imprecation  by 
all  tlie  people,  "  His  blood  be  on  us  and  on  our  children." 
This  curse  fulfilled  in  history  of  Jews  to  this  day. 
Strauss  says  imprecation  invented  later  to  account  for 
destruction  of  Jerusalem.  Ans:  There  is  no  real  aro^u- 
ment  against  its  historical  character,  for  it  arises  natuially 
in  the  struggle  between  Pilate  and  Priests;  it  is  not 
needed  to  account  for  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  (this 
long  ago  foretold);  it  explains  Pilate's  readiness  in  giv- 
ing up  Christ  and  releasing  Barabbas. 

Pilate  proves  false  to  traditionary  Roman  tolerance  in 
religion,  and  yields  Christ  on  the  ground  the  Jews  first 
urge,  ns  a  favor.  The  Hierarch}'.  Political  power  and 
the  people  here  combine  to  condemn  the  Lord  of  Glor^'. 
(Comp.  Ps.  2:  1,  2).  Some  say  scape-goat  typified  Barab- 
iDas.  But  Barabbas  bears  away  no  sin.  Both  goats  typif}- 
Christ.     Skeptics  throw  away  historical  accuracy  of  trial. 

§149.  Jesus  delivered  up,  scourged  and  mocked.  (Mt. 
27:  26-30;  Mk.  15:  15-19;  John'  19:  1-3.)  Lk.  alone 
irientions  abuse  from  Herod.  Mt,  and  Mk.  allude  to 
scourging  as  part  of  usual  proct^ss  before  crucifixion  ; 
John  as  tliough  Pilate  wished  to  excite  compassion  or 
contempt  and  procure  his  release.  That  this  was  purpose 
of  Pilate,  see  Lk.  28 :  16-23.  Many  hold  Christ  was 
twice  scourged.  Improbable  that  Pilate  would  allow  to 
be  repeated  this  cruelty  so  dangerous  to  life.  Soldiers 
were  employed,  and  not  lictors,  as  Pilate  was  a  sub-gov- 
ernor, and  not  [-*roconsul.  The  word  used  {iprjayzXXcoaa:;) 
implies  that  it  was  done  not  with  rods  but  with  the 
jiagellam.  Farrar :  "  It  was  a  punishment  so  hideous 
that,  under  its  lacerating  agony,  the  victim  generally 
fainted,  often  went  away  to  perish  under  the  mortifica- 
tion and  nervous  exhaustion  which  ensued."  Why  such 
malignity  of  Roman  troops  ?  Sliaring  the  hatred  against 
the  Jews,  inflamed  by  popular  clamor  and  by  contrast 
of  claims  and  humble  appearance  of  Christ,  they  are 
rude  enough  to  enjoy  the  brutal  sport  as  a  break  in  the 


y  "  "  v^i_--- <7        y-v-^-irV- 


-7 


;7^,=*--y    "i-^  t^6s^   -^^  ^y^^^^^M^      i^^:Z^irZJ   -^H>^^^   liJ^^^ 


'ti7 


oL'^-'\,^el(_ 


173 


(lull  iiionotoiiy  of  their  life.  The  publieity  is  noticed; 
a7T£ir)o.v,  technicall}-,  cohort,  is  the  whole  hand  (armed  by 
Pilate  for  fear  of  tiinuilt).  Scourged  in  the  PrBetorintii, 
enclosed  court  of  the  Palace.  Then  mock  him  as  king, 
[Hitting  on  him  a  scarlet  (Mt.),  or  purple  (Mk.)  soldier's 
cloak;  on  his  head  the  painful  crown  of  thorns;  in  his 
hand  a  reed.  Did  Christ  grasp  the  reed  with  his  hand  ? 
Slight  importance.  Probably  hands  bound.  They  soon 
"took  the  reed  and  sniote  hirn  on  the  head,''  and  then 
paid  mock  homage.  Why  all  this  indignity  allowed  Z^ 
1.  Exhibits  the  evil  of  sin  7~hlunaTi~(nnIFhynBxh~aTTstiTig 
itself  against  a  Savior.  Nevertheless  "  by  his  stripes  we  . 
are  healed."  2.  Shows  Gentiles  voluntarily  participated  _^ 
in  rejecting  Christ.  Brings  out  character  of  Jesus^his 
sublime  forbearance,  his  super-human  dignity.  A  mere 
man  could  not  have  borne  it.  A.1I  this  quietly  wiped  out 
by  skeptics.  Strauss  concedes  the  scourging  may  have 
been  perfoi-med.  &    ^ 

§150.  Pilate  .^till  seeks  to  release  Jesus.  Ecce  Horn  >.  Jno. 
19:  4-16.)  Given  by  John  alone.  Some  take  this  sec- 
tion with  §148.  Confusing,  and  forbidden  by  fact  that 
this  is  after  scourging.  Pilate  tries  to  excite  pity  or 
contempt  by  leading  Christ  out  in  humiliated  appear- 
ance, and  says  "  Behold  the  Man  !"  An  arch  on  Via 
Dolorosa  marks  the  scene.  Doubtful.  Effect  is  only  to 
call  out  new  rage — "  Crucify  him,  crucify  him."  Meyer 
insists  that  the  populace  is  not  mentioned  in  whole  sec- 
tion. Some  sa}'.  because  priests  were  afraid  of  vacillat- 
ing populace.  Most,  priests  mentioned  as  being  leaders. 
Jews  fear  Pilate  will  insist  on  releasing  Christ,  when  he 
sa3-s  ironically,  ^  take  ye  him  and  crucify  him,  etc."  So 
they  now  introduce  the  charge  of  blasphemy  :  "  We  have 
a  law,  and  by  our  law  he  ought  to  die,  because  he  made 
himself  the  Son  of  God."  Effect  on  Pilate  extraordinary 
— hears  it  for  the  first  time.  Superstitious  and  afraid 
before,  he  now  associates  this  claim  of  divinity  with  his 
notions  of  demigods,  and  is  more  afraid.  Leads  Christ 
back  to  Prsetorium,  and  in  tones  of  deepest  agitation 
asks  :  "  Whence  art  thou  ?"  Contrast  spirit  of  question 
with  that  in  previous  chapter.  Jesus  now  silent.  Pilate 
threatens.  Jesus  answers :  "  Thou  couldest  have  no 
power,  etc.,  .  .  .  therefore  he  that  delivered,  etc." 
John    19  :    11-12.     Wh}'   therefore  ?     Not  because   lesser 


174 

guilt  rests  on  weakness  and  timidity  of  Pilate  (Luther), 
but  because  Jews  illegal  and  willing  persecutors,  while 
Pilate  with  less  knowledge  is  the  unwilling  though  right- 
ful judge.  Farrar  :  "  Thus  with  infinite  dignity,  and  ^-et 
with  infinite  tenderness,  did  Jesus  judge  his  judge." 
Pilate  felt  it,  and  on  that  (E.  V.  "  from" thenceforth,") 
determined  to  release  him.  If  ever  a  prisoner  had  a 
chance  to  be  released  by  his  judge,  Christ  had  now.  This 
is  the  crisis  of  the  trial.  Jews  threaten,  "  if  thou  let  this 
man  go,  thou  art  not  Caesar's  friend."  Pilate  knows  the 
jealous  severity  of  Tiberius  towards  subordinates,  and 
remembering  his  own  former  cruelties,  now  yields  to  the 
threat.  He  brought  Jesus  forth  and  sat  down  on  the 
judgment  seat,  and  said  in  scorn,  '-Behold  your  king!" 
They  cry,  "Crucify."  Pilate;  "Shall  I  crucify  yonr 
king?"  They  answer:  "  We,  have  no  king  but  C?esar." 
This  is  the  lowest  point  in  their  hypocrisy.  IMiey  claim 
loyalty  to  Cfesarand  thus  renounce  all  expectation  of  the 
Messiah.  This  ends  the  trial.  TSTotice  Pilate  has  made 
six  etitbrts  to  release  Christ.  1.  Told  priests  and  people, 
"  I  find  no  fault  in  this  man."  2.  Sends  him  to  Herod. 
3.  On  return  from  Herod,  "I  will  therefore  chastise  him 
and  release  him."  4.  Appealed  to  the  people  to  release 
Christ  rather  than  Barabbas.  5.  After  scourging,  said, 
"  Behold  the  man  !"  6.  After  claim  of  "  Son"  of  God  " 
made  known. 

§151.  See  §146.  ^txa^^  ,^^wuu^i?^eA-t^  trz^-o-rx/ 

§152.  Jesus  led  away  to  he  crucified.  (Mt.  27  :  31-34  ; 
Mk.  15  :  20-23;  Lk.  23:  26-33;  John  19:  16,  17.) 

I.  Ti)ne  of  Orucijixioit :  Important  discrepancy  between 
John  and  Syn.  Alexander  :  Impossible  there  should  be 
a  mistake  in  so  public  a  transaction.  Mk.  15  :  25  saj's, 
"  it  was  the  third  hour  (9  a.  m.).  and  they  crucified  him." 
This  agrees  with  M.M.L.  that  there  was  darkness  from 
sixth  to  ninth  hour,  and  with  time  required  for  trials. 
John  19  :  14,  "  And  it  was  the  preparation  of  the  Pass- 
over and  about  the  sixth  hour  (noon) ;  and  he  saith  unto 
the  Jews,  Behold  yonr  king  !"  Various  attempts  to  re- 
move the  difiiculty  (see  Andrews).  1.  John's  reading  an 
error  of  transcription,  rpirrj  instead  of  exzv]  supported 
by  D.  L.  X.,  Euseb.,  Theophyl.,  Robinson,  Farrar.  But 
best  text  is  'ixrrj.  So  A.  B.  E.  X.  etc.  2.^-That  John 
uses  Roman  reckonino^  from  raidniijht.     Therefore  6  a.  m. 


)%ii^<^  T^v^l^    PO'^- 


a 


<2/l.-<---tf-L-/-<— yC  ' 


0<L- 


"^ 


tU 


^^-"C-^^^^— <^ 


7^^/ 


T    ^rOuuLyxj 


T-^-^-^JtZI^^-o^   o^  A^-t^/tiWt^- 


t-o*— <a_-<? 


--V'U'tP^ 


^jCzy  xL^^^y^J-€L.<L^  'iL^i'-^  '- 


y(^../\~C^Uj   Q.^^^^c::*-^-'^-^^ . 


175 

So   Tlioluek,  Olsl].,  Ewald,   Wieseler. 

€  reckon  in  this  way  elsewhere,  and  6  a.  m.  would  be 
early.  Too  short  time  for  trial,  too  long  between 
condemnation  and  crucifixion.  3.  That  preparation 
denotes  not  whole  day  but  part  immediiitely  preceding 
Sal)batli  from  3 — 6  p.  m.  Thus  6th  hour  before  prepara- 
tion would  be  n  A.  M.  4.  That  ojoa  is  division  of  day — 3 
hours.  "  Thus  1st  hour  of  da}-  was  from  6 — 9;  the  3d 
from  9—12;  the  6th  from  12-3,  the  9th  from  6—9" 
"(Andrews).  The  3d  hour  of  Mk.  was  from  9—12.  Dur- 
ing this  period  Jesus  was  crucified,  .folm  refers  to  end 
of  period  as  6th  hour.  So  Grotius,  Calvin,  Wetstein, 
but  unsupported  i)y  usage.  5.  Hofmann  and  Lichten- 
stein  put  comma  after  Tzapaaxvjrj^  and  read  6th  hour  of 
the  Passover;  counting  from  midnight,  which  brings  us 
to  6  A.  M.  But  feast  began  at  6  a.  m.,  not  at  midnight. 
6.  That  "about  the  sixth  hour  "  taken  in  loose  sense, 
would  be  after  9  and  before  12.  So  Andrews  and  Elli- 
cot.  Norton  trauHates,  "  towards  noon.''  7.  Lange 
(hwit)  that  the  two  writers  date  according  to  different 
idea.  Mark  may  date  from  before  scourging  because  of 
significant  antithesis  he  wishes  to  institute  between  3d 
and  6th  hour.  .John  says  "  towards  noon,"  because  the 
second,  more  Sabbatic  half  of  zaj)aaxvjri  was  approach- 
ing. (See  Lange  on  John  19:  14.)  Any  one  of  these 
solutions  is  more  probable  than  to  say  none  possible. 

II.  Place  of  Crucijixlfm  :  Alt.,  Mk.  and  John  give  the 
name  Golgotha  (Aramaic),  translated  xftaucou  totto:;  ;  Cal- 
varia  locus  (Vulg.),  "  place  of  a  skull  "  (E.  V.).  Lk.  23  : 
36.  Lk.  gives  xpaucou,  only  place  translated  "  Calvary." 
Supposed  bj'  Jerome  to  be  so  called  from  uncovered  or 
unburied  skulls;  others  that  it  was  a  place  of  execution. 
But  "  Skull  "  is  in  the  singular  not  [)lural,  and  Joseph, 
a  rich  man,  would  not  have  a  tomb  in  such  a  place. 
Common  explanation  is  that  the  name  arose  from  conicaJ 
shape  of  the  hillock  or  rock.  ■^Moant  Calvary  is  a  modern 
expression.  1.  Place  was  outside  city  walls).  Heb.  13: 
12,  Mt.  28:  11,  (John  19  :  16, 17.  2.  It  was  near  the  city. 
(John  19  :  20).  3.  It  was  near  the  sepulchre,  which  was 
in  a  garden  and  hewn  in  a  rock.  Jolm  19  :  41.  Fisher 
Howe  adds  a.  it  was  near  one  of  the  leading  thorough- 
fares (Mt.  27  :  3!'):  b.  it  was  eminently  conspicuous  (Mk. 
15:40;  Lk.  23:   49).     Andrews;  "  If  the   trial    of  our 


176 

Lord  was  at  the  palace  of  Herod  on  Mt.  Sioii,  he  could 
not  liave  passed  along  the  Via  Dolorosa."  Church  of 
Holy  Sepulchre  is  the  traditional  site,  su[)ported  by  Wil- 
liams, Tisch.,  Lange,  etc.,  and  opposed  by  Robinson, 
Wilson  aud  others.  The  main  difficulty  lies  in  settling 
the  course  of  the  second  wall — a  question  of  time  and 
money.  Eusebius  saj's  Helena  (mother  of  Constantine) 
built  a  church  over  the  site.  Fergusson,  on  architectural 
and  otlier  grounds,  sa3^s  that  Mosque  of  Omar  marks  the 
true  site  of  the  sepulchre.  See  Smith's  Diet.  art.  Jerusa- 
lem.) Answered  conclusively  in  Ed.  Review  and  Bib. 
Sacra.  Yet  architectural  argument  against  traditional 
site,  is  strong. 

III.  Significance  of  Crucijixion :  Why  this  mode  of 
death?  Crucifixion  known  to  Grecians,  Romans,  Egyp- 
tians, Parthians,  Phoenicians,  Indians  ;  not  used  by  Jews. 
Significant  that  his  death  was  in  a  mode  familiar  to  whole 
heathen  v,'orld  for  lowest  criminals.  Josephus  says  : 
"  Titus  could  not  find  wood  enough  to  make  crosses  or 
places  to  put  them  when  he  took  Jerusalem."  Cicero 
(Verr.  5:  6-f)  speaks  of  it  as  a  cruel  and  terrible  punish- 
ment, such  as  was  not  inflicted  on  Roman  citizens.  Be- 
fore Christ,  to  bear  the  cross  was  a  classic  phrase  express- 
ing dishonor.  This  mode  of  punishment  was  abolished 
by  Constantine,  through  reverence  for  the  cross.  Un- 
known to  Jews,  except  after  deatli  the  body  was  some- 
times hanged  (Deut.  21  :  22,  23),  as  special  curse  (Num. 
25  :  4  ;  2  Sam.  21 :  6).  Controversial  Jews  do  not  use 
the  phrase  crucify ;  these  say  they  hanged,  him.  Yet 
crucifixion  was  predicted  :  Christ  to  be  pierced  (Ps.  22  : 
16:  Zech.  12:  10).  Also  the  scourging,  the  drink,  and 
the  parting  of  the  garments  belong  to  this  mode.  The 
same  dishonor  associated  with  Jewish  i.anging  (Deut.' 
21 :  28)  inflicted  on  Christ  (Gal.  3  :  13). 

From  the  Crucifixion  we  learn  :  1.  Judicial  nature  of 
his  death.  He  paid  the  supreme  penalty  to  rescue  us 
from  the  curse  of  the  law.  2.  He  died  for  the  whole 
w^orJd.  Jewish  Messiah  died  by  Roman  punishment, 
that  "  the  blessing  of  Abraham  might  come  on  the  Gen- 
tiles," (Gal.  3:  14).  So  he  decUii-ed  ;  "  And  I,  if  I  be 
lifted  up,  etc.,"  (John  12:  33).  3.  His  death  was  con- 
spicuous. Lifted  up  as  brazen  serpent,  an  object  for 
faith  of  all.     4.  It  was  ignominious  and  painful.     This 


f      ^ 


177 

shows  the  nature  of  sin.  See  Plato's  portrait  of  tlie  just 
man  (Republic,  II.  362),  "  He  sliall  be  seouro^ecl  .  .  .  and 
erucitied."  Clem.  Alex,  says  Plato  speaks  like  a  prophet ; 
Lightfoot,  that  only  chronological  impossibility  saves  ' 
him  from  imputation  of  plagiarism.  5.  It  was  a  Jinger- 
ing  death.  We  have  three  years  with  the  living  Christ; 
this  gives  tliree  hours  intercourse  with  the  dying  Christ. 
6.  It  was  fully  attested  :  not  done  in  a  corner.  l!^o 
rationalist  can  deny  the  fact. 

^N'o  wonder  death  of  Christ  transformed  the  ci-oss  to 
symbol  of  highest  glory,  Chrysostom  says  :  •'  Symbol 
seen  everywhere,  tor  we  are  not  ashamed  of  the  cross." 
In  decline  of  the  church  it  became  an  object  of  worship. 

IV.  The  Form  of  the  Cross,  etc.  There  were  three 
ancient  forms  in  use  :  a.  the  crux  decussata  in  shape  of 
letter  X  (St.  Andrew's);  b.  the  crux  commissa,  in  shape  of 
letter  T;  the  crux  inwrissa,  with  upright  one-third  of  its 
length  above  the  transverse  t  (Roman).  Origen  says 
like  T.  So  Tertullian,  who  argued  from  the  mark  like 
a  cross  placed  on  forehead  (Ez.  9  :  4).  Same  form  on 
coins  of  Constantine,  coinjnonly  supposed  to  be  Roman 
crux  immissa.  So  gathered  from  comparisons  of  Justin, 
Jerome,  etc.,  to  man  praying  with  outstretched  arms,  to 
four  quarters  of  lieavens.  So  in  catacombs  and  early 
paintings.     So  writing  nailed  above  his  head. 

The  cross  (not  a  tree)  was  probably  made  of  sycamore 
or  olive.  Artists  make  it  too  high  or  too  heavy.  The 
feet  would  come  quite  near  the  ground.  The  hyssop 
was  only  an  herb,  and  the  sponge  on  a  hyssop  branch 
reached  his  mouth.  The  thrust  from  a  spear  was  there- 
fore nearly  horizontal.  Cross  was  light  enough  to  be 
carried  by  one  man.  0     ^ 

"  And  when  they  had  mocked  him,  the3'  took  off  the 
purple  from  him  and  led  him  out  to  crucify  him,"  (Mk. 
15:  20).  Crown  of  thorns  not  mentioned;  probably  re- 
moved. Roman  law  that  condemned  should  be  im- 
mediately- executed  ;  important  to  priests  as  well  as 
against  their  law  that  body  should  remain  out  all  night 
(Deut.  21 :  23).  They  proceed  immediately  to  crucify. 
A  quaternion  of  soldiers,  and  not  lictors,  as  Pilate  was 
only  sub-governor.  The  centurion  Avas  usually  mounted. 
Not  told  how  far  customs  were  observed.  Roman  cus- 
tom, a  tablet  hunof  around  neck  or  carried   before  crimi- 


178 

nal.  Jewish  custom  a  herald  crying  his  name  and  crime. 
Tloman  usage  made  condemned  bear  his  cross.  John 
19  :  17  says  Jesus  bore  his  cross;  Syns.,  they  compelled 
Simon,  a  Cyreuian.  This  probably  when  Jesus  became 
faint.  Perhaps  both  together  (seeLange  on  Lk.  23:  26). 
Meyer  supposes  him  a  slave;  some  say  he  was  seized 
because  a  disciple  ;  probably  because  he  was  near. 
Cyrene  is  in  Libya.  There  a  colony  of  Jews;  many  in 
Jerusalem  (Acts  2  :  10).  Simon  Niger  and  Lucius, 
prophets  or  teachers,  were  from  Cyrene  (Act«i  13  :  1). 
From  fact  that  he  was  "  coming  from  the  country,"  no 
inference  that  this  was  a  working  and  not  a  great  feast 
day.  Multitudes  of  people  and  women  followed  lament- 
insf.  I^ot  the  usual  lamentation  for  dead,  which  at  least 
according  to  later  traditions,  was  forbidden  for  criminals. 
Sr>me  say  they  were  his  Galilean  friends.  This  does  not 
agree  with  "  Daughters  of  Jerusalem."  Some  say,  from 
mere  pity.  Yet  Christ  deems  them  worthy  of  a  particu- 
lar address.  Christ's  reply,  like  his  lamentation  over 
Jerusalem,  alludes  to  prophecies  fulfilled.  (Is.  54  :  1  : 
Hos.  10:  8;  Ez.  20:  47,^  comp.  21:  3  seq.)  These  his 
last  words  of  any  length.  Josephus  gives  a  dire  comment 
when  he  tells  of  women  eating  their  children  during  the 
siege.  No  instance  in  gospels  of  women  doing  or  pay- 
ing anything  against  Christ.  Arrived  at  Golgotha,  they 
proceed  to  crucify.  Wine  mingled  with  m3'rrh  offered 
to  deaden  pain.  Farrar :  "It  had  been  the  custom  of 
wealthy  ladies  in  Jerusalem  to  provide  this  stupefying 
potion  at  their  own  expense,  and  they  did  so  quite  irre- 
spectively of  their  sympathy  for  any  individual  criminal." 
No  analogous  custom  at  Rome.  Mt.  says  "  vinegar 
mingled  with  gall."  Mk.,  "  wine  mingled  with  myrrh." 
No  contradiction.  Soldiers  carried  a  light  acid  wine 
(Mt.  27 :  34).  This  was  mingled  with  yo'kq^  i.  e.,  any- 
thing hitter.  Our  Lord  refuses;  an  act  of  sublimest 
heroism.     Not  his  purpose  to  avoid  suffering. 

§153.  The  Crucifixion.  (Mt.  27:  35-38;  Mk.  15  :  24- 
28  ;  Lk.  23  :  33,  34,  38  ;  John  19  :  18-24).  Mt.  and  Mk. 
speak  of  dividing  garments  too  soon.  Was  he  con- 
demned and  affixed  to  cross  before  or  after  its  elevation? 
Commonly  after;  so  early  fathers.  About  centre  of 
cross  a  sediU  to  support  weight  of  body.  Binding  to 
cross  essential  to  prevent  tearing.     Disputed  whether  the 


^"H^ff-^/f^ld/    U^r:^<^    /..  u-c'^i^y-^  ^^(rr\  z.^rMxW  A^   -Q.^if'ihyCi'tyuUfra^ 


C(^  Ua^'c^-'H^^  l^-i?-^  -«^ 


4- 


179 

feet  were  nailed  sefiarately  or  together.  Most  fatl>ers 
say  nailed  separately.  Because  Christ  walked  after- 
wards, Rationalists  say  feet  simply  bound,  hence  Christ 
did  not  die,  only  swooned,  Justin  and  Fathers  say  Ps. 
22  :  16  "  They  pierced  my  hands  and  my  feet,"  fulfilled, 
and  cite  Lk.  24  :  39  :  "  Behold  my  hands  and  my  feet." 
Two  malefactors,  robbers,  were  crucified  with  Christ. 
Was  this  caused  by  the  Jews  to  degrade  Christ,  or  by 
Pilate  to  insult  the  Jews  ?  Probably  the  latter.  Is.  53: 
12,  "  And  he  was  numbered  with  the  transgressors,"  ful- 
filled. Mk.  15:  28  omitted  by  A,  B,  C,^D,  X,  Tisch., 
Alf ,  etc. 

The  Seven  Utterances.  Luke  only  (23:  34)  gives  first 
utterance,  "Father,  forgive  them."  No  limitation  |in 
truth  implied.  Universal,  hence  appropriate  in  Luke. 
Conjectured  that  these  words  were  uttered  during  nail- 
ing. They  signify  :  1.  Intercession  of  Chrisi  as  Priest, 
a  sacrificial  act.  2.  The  state  of  mind  of  Christ  in  midst 
of  sutfering.  3.  The  spirit  of  his  teaching,  "  Love  your 
enemies."  Fruits  of  this  prayer  at  Pentecost.  Comp. 
Stephen's  last  words. 

I\irting  of  garments.  Custom  to  divide  garments 
among  executioners.  Condemned  was  stripped  naked, 
not  even  cloth  about  the  loins.  Divided  upper  garment 
into  four  parts.  Cast  lots  for  his  coat.  Priest's  tunic 
seamless.  Must  not  itjfer  Christ's  coat  a  priest's. 
Prophecy  fulfilled  (Is.  53 :  12).  Mt.  3^:  end  of  v.  35  an 
interpolation.  »'" 

Title  over  Cross.  Mt.,  "  This  is  Jesus  the  king  of  the 
Jews."  Mk.,  "The  king  of  the  Jews."  Lk.,  "^This  is 
the  king  of  the  Jews."  John,  "Jesus  of  JSTazareth,  the 
king  of  the  Jews."  Notice  difterences  :  1.  John  full, 
others  compress,  2,  Three  languages  used.  This  might 
account  for  diflterenees,  Farrar :  "  Title  written  in  the 
otiicial  Latin,  in  the  current  Greek,  in  the  vernacular 
Aramaic," 

Why  did  Pilate  write  this  superscription?  Ans  :  a. 
To  make  a  show^  of  legality,  b.  To  ridicule  the  Jews. 
This  last  strongest,  and  proved  by  remonstrance  of  the 
priests,  "  Write  not.  The  king  of  the  Jews;  but  that  he 
said,  I  am  king  of  the  Jews."  What  Pilate  had  written 
in  scorn  was  in  reality  a  profound  truth.  Pilate  had 
vacillated   in    serious   matters,   now   obstinate   in  small. 


180 

r 

Lange  insists  (from  Mt.  27  :  08)  that  the  thieves  wore 
brought  on  bv  a  different  guard  of  trcH^ps,  after  the  title 
was  set  up.     Mt.'s  use  of  zozz.  not  strongly  temporal. 

§154.  Jews  mock  at  Jesus  on  (he  cross.  lie  commends  his 
mother  to  John.  (Mt.  27:  39-44:  Mk.  15  :  29-32;  Lk. 
23  :  35-37,  39-43  ;  John  19  :  25-27.)  Four  classes  par- 
ticipate in  mocking  : 

I.  The.  passers  bv.  (Mt.  and  Mk.)  Xot  (Uily  tlio  cas- 
ual f)assers,  but  the  crowd  railed  at  him,  wagging  their 
beads.  Fnltillment  of  Ps.  22:  7.  AVords  o\^  mockery: 
"  Thou  that  destroyest  the  temple,  etc.,"  signiticant  as 
now  being  fulfillpd. 

II.  Chief  Priests,  Scribes  and  Elders  (Sanhedrim) 
mock  his  official  character.  (MML.)  They  sneer 
(literally  turn  up  the  nose)  at  meaning  of  Jesus.  "  He 
saved  others,  himself  he  cannot  save."'  They  mock  also 
bis  trust  in  God.  Ps.  22  :  8.  They  unconsciously  ex- 
press the  profound  truth  that  the  salvation  of  others  im- 
plies sacrifice  of  self. 

III.  Tbe  soldiers  mock,  saying,  "If  tbou  be  tbe  Kin<f 
of  the  Jews.,  save  thyself.'"  It  was  near  noon,  their  din- 
ner hour.  They  offer  him  vinegar  (Lk.)  i.  e.  tbeir  light 
acid  wine.  Some  identify  tbis  with  previous  offering: 
others  with  offering  just  before  his  death.  Ebrard  :  "  A 
distinction  is  very  properly  made  between  (1)  the  mtjrrh 
offered  in  order  t;o  stupefy  ;  (2)  the  tantalizing  offer  of 
the  posca  in  Lk?'a|^36;  and  (3)  the  offer  of  tbe  posca 
immediately  before  the  death  of  Jesus." 

IV.  The  two  thieves  railed  on  him  saying  "  If  thou 
be  the  Christ,  save  thyself  and  us.''  Notice,  each  class  of 
scoffers  brings  out  specific  difference  between  Christ  and 
themselves.  All  involve  the  false  idea  of  the  Messiah 
and  his  kingdom.  Strauss  objects  to  the  differences  in 
the  accounts,  and  that  priests  could  not  quote  Ps.  22 :  8, 
9  without  acknowledging  themselves  enemies  of  the 
Messiah.  Ans  :  Proves  too  much.  Strauss  admits  many 
facts  which  were  clearly  predicted:  this  Psalm  was  Mes- 
sianic, and  so  naturally  used. 

Conversion  of  thief  Word  implies  violence  rather 
than  theft.  Substitution  represented — "He  was  num- 
bered with  the  transgressors."  Cross  of  Christ  discrim- 
inates among  men — election  represented.  Christ  shown 
aa  Prophet  in  words  to  penitent  thief :  as  Priest,  in  offer- 


X  ^■'-^z^-^^'^^^  X^^rzs^.x-t^/^ 


/Lc^  y^"-^    ^^^-^ 


o-t-t-^-l. 


A'' . 


/"_<'.,  t  ^-^-T^tV^-C'^ 


■--C- 


-yt^y^     X. 


XJ;^ 


181 

ing  up  himself;  as  King,  in  pardoning.  True  repentance 
at  eleventh  hour  represented.  Abuse  of  the  example 
removed  by  exannde  of  the  other  thief 

Second  Utterance:  "  To-day  thou  shalt  be  with  me  in 
Paradise."  Paradise  used  three  times  in  IST.  T.  Decisive 
against  Purgatory,  not  necessarily  against  an  intermedi- 
ate state  of  the  dead.  Still  a  question  where  Christ  was 
during  three  (hiys.  Tliis  utterance  predicts  Christ's 
death  on  this  day.  Speedy  death  unusual.  Objections  : 
1.  Mt.  and  Mk.  say  both  reviled;  Lk.  says  one,  Ans  : 
M.M.  speak  generically,  or  (better)  both  mocked,  then 
ojie  repented.  O — - 

lliird  Utterance:  "  Woman,  behold  tliv  son  !"  "  Be- 
hold tliy  mother  !"  John  19  :  26,  27.  Women  at  the 
cross,  his  mother  and  his  mother's  sister,  Mary  the  wife 
of  Cleopha?,  and  Mary  Mag-dalbiie.  This  utterance  shows 
Christ's  human  love  for  his  mother  and  confidence  in 
his  friends.  Shows  his  grasp  of  tlie  future  of  his  people, 
and  that  he  makes  provision  for  them.  Objected  that 
M.M.  speak  only  ot  women,  Lk.  of  his  acquaintance,  and 
only  John  of  himself  and  Mary.  No  contradiction.  Ob- 
jected that  John  says  they  s^^ood  by  the  cross,  while 
Synoptists  say  afar  off.  The  Synoptists  refer  to  later 
period.  This  utterance  Andrews  supposes  before,  Kralft 
after,  the  darkness  and  final  mocking — unimportant. 
Gospels  show  that  Mary  laid  up  these  things  and  pon- 
dered them  in  her  heart.  It  may  be  her  influence  is  seen 
in  John's  g(^spel. 

§155.  Darkness.  Death  of  Jesns.  (Mt.  27  :  45-50  ; 
Mk.  15:  33-37;  Lk.  23:44-46;  John  11-28-30.)  A 
new  element  in  supernatural  accompaniments,  darkness 
from  12  to  3,  earthquake,  rending  of  veil,  an  opening  of 
graves.  These  are  divine  attestations  to  Christ,  and 
symbols  of  the  effect  of  his  death.  Would  have  been 
unnatural  and  out  of  analogy  had  no  signs  been  given 
now.  Darkness  from  sixth  to  ninth  hour.  How  long 
Jesus  had  hung  upon  the  cross  depends  on  harmony  of 
Mt.  15  :  25  with  John  19:  14.  It  was  high  noon,  when 
light  and  heat  greatest,  that  sun  was  darkened.  Meyer 
says  thafLuke  implies  sun  partially  obscured  till  noon, 
then  darkened.  Substantiated  by  Cod.  Sin.,  which  sup- 
plies in  V.  44,  TOO  ^Xcou  IxXmovTo:;. 

Extent  of  Darkness:  Was  it  confined  to  Palestine, 
or  more  extended  ?     If  the  former,  explains  lack  of  men- 


182 

tion  by  contemporaries.  Cause  of  darkness.  Many 
fathers  say  eclipse.  Phlegon  of  Tralles  says  in  202 
Olympiad  occurred  greatest  eclipse  ever  known.  But 
this  eclipse  was  a  ye-dr  or  two  too  late,  and  could  not  oc- 
cur during  full  moon.  Seyffarth  holds  to  eclipse,  and 
supposes  the  Passover  two  weeks  after  regular  time. 
Some  connect  darkness  with  earthquake.  Majority  say 
it  was  entirely  miraculous. 

Objections:  1.  John  omits  all  supernatural  additions. 
2.  No  adequate  cause  for  them.  3.  Not  mentioned  in 
history.  4.  Not  appealed  tc  by  Apostles.  5.  Motive 
for  mythical  origin  obvious.  Ans :  1.  Friedlieb  quotes 
Tertullian  and  Lucian  as  saying  that  the  fact  was  re- 
corded in  heathen  accounts  now  lost.  2.  Apostles  refer 
to  Resurrection  as  proof  of  supernatural,  and  greater  in- 
cludes the  less.  If  no  other  proof,  authority  of  the  three 
Evangelists  sufficient.  The  darkness  symbolizes  sym- 
pathy of  nature.  The  earth  cursed  because  of  man's  sin 
now  participates  in  redemption.  Corresponds  also  with 
darkness  in  soul  of  Jesus.  At  his  birth  a  new  star  came 
forth  ;  at  his  death  the  sun  was  darkened. 

Fourth  Utterance:  "  My  God,  my  God,  why  hast  thou 
forsaken  me?"  Mt.  27:46;  jMk.  15:  34.  Some  say 
after  darkness,  because  drink  offered;  others,  just  be- 
fore. This  the  only  one  of  the  seven  utterances  pre- 
served by  M.M.  Mt.  gives  Hebrew,  Mk.  the  Aramaic, 
Meaning  of  this  utterance  :  It  expresses  a  reality.  God 
had  really  forsaken  him.  His  human  soul  is  left  desti- 
tute. Expresses  the  extremity  of  what  he  came  to  bear. 
Lange,  sympathy  of  soul  with  body  ;  Meyer,  physical 
pain.  Naturalistic  interpreters  deny  importance  of  the 
words.  Others,  little  stress  on  mei'e  words,  as  the}'  are 
simply  the  opening  words  of  a  Psalm  of  triumph  (Ps. 
22).  Others,  an  ordinary  ejaculation  of  disti'ess.  Others^ 
failure  of  his  plan.  Others,  mythical.  Bystanders  say, 
"  Ijeh^dd  jiejgalleth  Elias.""^  Olshausen,  Lange,  that  ter- 
rified and  confused,  they  think  judgment  and  Elijah 
truly  coming.  Most  say,  it  was  a  wilful  misunderstand- 
ing. 

Fifth  Utterance:  "I  thirst."  Jno.  19  :  '25.  Was 
this  to  fulfil  prophecy  (Ps.  69:  21),  or  a  real  want? 
When  he  used  the  language  "I  thirst,"  he  meant  it. 
Meyer  :  1.  John  never  puts  telic  clause  first.     2.  Ps.  69: 


_7  N'   nr,^c^^>     %y0^^n^'    (j-iy^^.-^-^'   -t>-oc4-    ou-^,^  o-^-*-J  • 


^ 


/ 


tjh-r-'C<><— i-^    ^-^C'v./i,- — --^(     *-C>     0  I 


(J)    l/O^^  ^V^ClZUj\..<lJI^'^     lA/v^A>><.nr<:^X-M      ^^^^^^---^^  §"0^ 


^-^^^l     _/U>i6/w^A^     ^  oJJl   'jCa 


--"^^UJr." 


7/LX(:W/'i=^-^--'-'-c2-^    lQ.-^--2^'i-tu2My'  ^x-zyLJiyh^ 


183 

21  refei's  to  previous  ofier  of  vinegar.  3.  Christ  would 
not  now  say  "  I  thirst,"  if  not  true.  (See  Meyer  on  John 
19:  28.)  This  the  only  word  from  the  cross  expressing 
physical  suffering.  Gethseniane  shows  spiritual  suffer- 
ing not  to  be  lost  sight  of;  this  shows  the  sarae  in  re-; 
gard  to  the  physical.  One  ran  and  filled  a  sponge  with 
vinegar  and  gave  him  to  drink.  Having  satisfied  this 
compassionate  impulse,  he  Joins  the  rest  in  mockery  : 
"  Let  alone  ;  let  us  see  whether  Elias  will  come  to  take  him 
down."  Last  words  somewhat  differently  reported.  Mt. 
and  Mk.  say  he  cried  with  a  loud  voice,  and  gave  up  the 
ghost.  But  word  for  voice  {cpcovrj)  mci'ns  articulate  ut- 
terance. 

Sixth  Utterance:  "  It  is  finished,"  given  by  John.  To 
be  taken  before  utterance  given  by  Luke,  because  more 
appropriate  and  intelligible  here.  Evident  reference  to 
V.  28.  Perfect  tense;  it  has  been  and  continues  finished. 
All  O.  T.  prophecies  and  types  fulfilled.  He  does  not 
mean  simply  the  scripture  has  been  fulfilled.  The  words 
go  back  to  the  councils  of  eternity.  Redemption,  and 
Revelation  of  God  to  man  are  finished.  Comp.  John  17  : 
4.  Hengst.  finds  reference  to  Ps.  22  :  31.  Finished  is  his 
farewell  greeting  to  earth;  the  next  utterance  marks  his 
entrance  to  heaven. 

Seventh  Utterance :  "  Father,  into  thy  hands  I  commend 
my  spirit."  (Lk.  23  :  46).  Tisch.  reads  ;r«oarr^£//«/.  This 
more  natural.  His  last  words  not  an  assertion  of  divin- 
ity but  trust.  He  resigns  himself  to  his  Father.  Taken 
from  Ps.  31  :  5. 

These  seven  utterances  have  a  literature  of  their  own. 
Notice,  1.  how  many  come  from  O.  T.;  2.  how  wonderful 
their  comprehensiveness;  3.  how  natural  their  sequence. 
He  who  exhausts  them  has  little  to  know  about  either 
covenant. 

The  first  is  a  prayer  for  pardon  of  his  enemies.  Lk. 
23:  34. 

Second,  Shows  judgment  and  saving  power.  Lk.  23  : 
43. 

Third,  Christ's  tender  care  for  his  people.  Jn.  19: 
26,  27. 

Fourth,  Depth  of  punishment  for  sin.  Mt.  27  :  46; 
Mk.  15  :  34. 

Fifth,  His  humanity  and  physical  suffering.  Jn.  19  : 
28. 


184 

Sixth,  His  triiniipbaiit  victory.     Jn.  19  :  30. 

Seventh,  His  trust  in  God.     Lk.  23  :  46. 

It  is  remarkable  that  the  four  Evauijelists  avoid  the 
expression,  "-y^f  dipH  "  Thej  say,  "  He  ^ave  up  the 
ghost."     It  was  a  voluntary  act. 

§156.  Supernatural  accompaniments  continued.  Impres- 
sion  on  different  classes  of  witnesses.  (Mt.  27  :  51-56  ;  Mk. 
15  :  88-41 ;  Lk.  23  :  45,  47-49).  The  veil  of  temple  ren.t, 
earthquake,  graves  opened  and  (iead  raised.  Luke  puts 
rending  of  veil  before  statement  of  Christ's  death.  The 
same  word  used  in  LXX.  for  both  inner  and  outer  veil. 
Means  here,  inner  veil.  Denied,  because  1.  known  only 
to  priests,  who  would  not  tell,  and  2.  not  referred  to  later 
in  N.  T.  Naturalistic  interpreters  describe  it  as  effect 
of  earthquake  upon  veil  old  or  tender  or  fastened  at  four 
corners.  Tradition  in  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews  says  a  beam 
fell  against  it.  Its  meaning  is  plain.  The  typical  system' 
is  ended.  All  believers  are  now  priests  and  may  enter 
through  the  Veil  to  the  Holiest  of  Holies  (Heb.  10  :  19). 
Earthquake  and  grave-opening  mentioned  by  Mt.  alone. 
Objected  1.  That  this  resurrection  of  saints  was  never 
appealed  to  later.  2.  What  became  of  them  ?  3.  What 
was  the  use  of  it?  Some  try  to  destroy  the  text.  Some 
say  earthquake  opened  graves,  which  were  found  empty, 
hence  the  report.  (Farrar).  Others,  it  was  all  visionary. 
Strauss,  all  mythical  ;  they  had  not  yet  separated  second 
advent  from  first.  Do  the  words  "  after  his  resurrection  " 
qualify  their  leaving  the  graves  or  their  going  into  the 
city?  Most  place  all  after  his  resurrection,  because  1. 
Christ  is  called  the  first-fruits,  and  2.  His  resurrection 
necessary  to  new  life  of  the  saints.  How  did  they  rise  ? 
Was  it  in  physical  bodies  to  die  again?  Most  likely  in 
resurrection  bodies — recognizable — not  to  live  with  men, 
but  to  ascend  with  Christ.  Who  were  they?  Some 
say  those  recently  dead,  or  they  would  not  have  been 
recognized.  Others  say  O.  T.  patriarchs  and  prophets. 
Tradition  gives  their  names.  Meaning  clear:  The  sacri- 
fice now  made  is  victory  over  death.  Schaft':  "  So  much 
only  appears  certain  to  us  that  it  was  a  supernatural  and 
symbolic  event  which  proclaimed  the  truth  that  the  death 
and  resurrection  of  Christ  was  a  victory  over  death  and 
Hades,  and  opened  the  door  to  everlasting  life."  The 
centurion  and  soldiers,  after  Christ's  last  cry  (Mk.),  and 


Ci^'-^^-^    ^v-#-X<-^-'^-^6'<:k.-'^^^  oS^iyf^ 


185 

the  supernatural  accompaniments  (Mt.)  say  "Truly  this 
was  the  Son  of  God."  Luke  gives,  "  certainly'  this  was 
a  righteous  man.'"  Some  say  the  words  must  be  taken 
in  heathen  sense,  i.  e.,  a  demi-god  (So  Meyer).  More 
common  opinion  is  that  the  centurion  had  some  knowl- 
edge and  this  is  incipient  faith.  At  all  events  he  is  con- 
vinced that  Christ  is  true.  He  is  the  precursor  of  Cor- 
nelius, the  tirst  fruits  of  Gentiles  acknowledging  the 
Savior.  We  have  important  witness  to  truth  of  these 
details.  The  mass  of  the  people  are  impressed.  Stricken 
with  terror  and  remorse,  they  smote  their  breasts  and 
returned  (Lk.  23  :  48).  Representatives  of  Israel  and 
the  Centurion  of  the  Gentiles  are  witnesses  to  the  fact 
and  power  of  his  death.  The  friends  of  Christ  are  also 
present.  Lk.  says  "all  his  acquaintance."  Mt.  and  Mk. 
specify  names  of  some  of  the  women.  By  these  friends 
the  knowledge  of  his  teaching  is  preserved  and  handed 
down.     All  classes  are  witnesses. 

§157.  Takimi  down  from  the  Cross  and  Burial.  Two 
striking  fulfillments  of  prophecy  seen  in  a  departure  both 
from  Roman  and  Jewish  usage.  The  Roman  custom 
was  to  leave  the  bodies  hanging  until  devoured  by  birds. 
Jews  of  course  did  not.  (Dent.  21  :  23).'  And  the  Sab- 
bath was  an  "High  Day."  Bleek:  "High  Bay"  be- 
cause the  first  day  of  the  Feast,  or  Nisan  15.  But  if  it 
were  the  second  or  16th  of  i^isan,  the  day  on  which 
the  ott'erings  were  brought  to  the  temple — and  from 
which  Pentecost  was  reckoned,  it  would  also  be  an 
"  Bigh  Dayr 

Did  the  Jews  know  that  Jesus  had  died  ?  Not  told. 
If  they  did,  the  request  was  for  the  thieves.  This  break- 
ing of  the  legs  was  for  torture.  It  was  only  the  usual 
adjunct  of  Crucifixion.  There  is  no  evidence  that  this 
was  the  "  mercy  stroke,"  for  more  merciful  means  were 
in  use  ;  as  the  stab,  &c.  It  seems  to  have  been  rather  for 
additional  torture  and  ignominy.  Possibly  they  had  in 
mind,  the  prophecy  implied  in  Exod.  12:  46 — "Neither 
shall  ye  break  a  bone  thereof" — and  wished  to  disprove 
thereb}'  his  Messiahship.  Some  argue  from  John  19 : 
32  that  a  new  body  of  soldiers  were  employed  in  this. 
But  the  message  was  sufficient.  They  broke  the  legs  of 
the  two  thieves  first :  probably  because  on  the  outside. 
One  of  the  soldiers  thrust  a  lance  into  the  side  of  Jesus, 


{ 


186 

to  m:)ke  sure  of  his  actual  death.  It  was  an  easier  and 
more  certain  mode  than  the  breaking  of  his  legs.  As 
already  dead,  there  was  no  need  of  torture.  Thus  were 
these  soldiers  witnesses  of  the  reality  of  his  death. 

It  has  been  argued  against  John's  recording  this  inci- 
dent, that  "  no  one  doubted  Christ's  death  in  his  day." 
Ans :  1,  Even  if  true,  the  fact  of  his  death  is  so  im- 
portant that  John  would  not  omit  it.  And  the  Corin- 
thians did  deny  his  real  death  already.  Its  bearing  in 
our  own  da}'  is  obvious.  2.  It  proves  the  reality  of  the 
body  of  Christ  against  the  Docetge.  John  himself  says 
he  did  it  to  confirm  the  faith  of  his  readers :  a.  "  Neither 
shall  ye  break  a  bone  thereof."  Ex.  12:  46.  Ps.  34  : 
30.  b.  "  They  shall  look  on  him  whom  they  have 
pierced."  Zech.  12  :  10.  The  main  fact  is  the  lance- 
thrust;  the  flow  of  blood  and  water  is  secondary  and 
confirmatory,  therefore  not  miraculous.  No  symbolical 
meaning  dwelt  on  but  (I.  John  5  :  6)  itself  a  symbol  of 
the  atoning  and  cleansing  power  of  Christ's  blood.  ^ 
Rationalists  who  deny  the  reality  of  his  death  deny  the 
spear-thrust,  or  pronounce  it  superficial.  This  is  contrary 
to  the  words  themselves — to  the  intention  and  to  the 
invitation  to  Thomas — John  20  :  27.  It  was  probably 
the  left  side,  as  that  was  surer  death,  and  it  accounts  for  n? 
the  blood  and  water.  The  thrust  nearly  horizontal  and 
but  slightly  inclined  upward.  The  nature  of  this  flow 
is  included  in  the  wider  question — what  was  the  physical 
cause  of  his  death  ? 

1.  Miraculous  The  ry,  held  by  the  Reformers,  Fathers, 
Meyer,  &c.  If  his  death  was  miraculous,  so  was  proba- 
bly the  flow  of  blood  and  water.  The  natural  arguments 
are  a.  his  speedy  death;  his  strength  of  body  and  mind 
to  the  end;  the  expectation  of  the  Jews  that  he  would 
linger.  Pilate's  surprise  at  the  report  of  his  death,  h. 
The  terms  employed  :  '•  He  gave  up  the  spirit."  c. 
The  words  of  Jesus  :  John  19  :  11  and  10  :  18.  d.  Argu- 
ment from  the  divine  nature.  Also  the  frequent  N.  T. 
expression  "  he  died  for  us."  The  Jews  slew  him,  which 
would  not  be  true  if  he  died  from  natural  causes. 

2.  The  spear  thrust— the  cause  of  his  death.  Founded 
on  a  reading  of  Mt.  27:  49;  supported  by  B.  C.  L.  and 
Cod.  Sin.  But  it  is  an  interpolation  and  contradicts 
John  Griiner's  view.    His  heart  was  pierced  before  death. 


o^  \,i^Aj\j^y\Si^ 


0 


187 

The  water  was  from  the  pericardium.  Debility  and 
anxiety  produced  effusion  before  his  death.  Ans  :  The 
physiolo2:ical  facts  are  disputed,  and  the  narrative  plainly 
implies  death  before  the  lance-thrust. 

3.  Weakness.  To  the  objection  that  it  was  too  sudden, 
they  answer  :  The  perfection  of  his  organization,  or  men- 
tal anguish.  What  then  of  the  blood  and  watei'?  a.  If 
the  heart  was  pierced,  there  would  be  no  flow  from  it. 
b.  Extravasations,  c.  The  Bertholines  argue  a  bloody 
serum  in  the  cavity  of  the  chest.  Fact  is  disputed 
physiologically  :  and  that  is  not  blood  and  water,  d. 
Lanffe's  idea  is  that  liis  transformation  had  bei^un.  c. 
His  death  was  natural  but  the  blood  and  water  was 
miraculous. 

4.  Stroud's  theory.  He  died  from  a  rupture  of  the  ven- 
tricle of  the  heart  produced  by  mental  agony.  Blood 
separated  in  the  thorax.  There  was  time  enough  and 
this  is  analogous  to  the  bloody  sweat  in  Gethsemane. 
Objection  :  The  blood  would  be  coagulated.  A  coinci- 
dence of  his  death  and  the  knowledge  on  the  part  of 
Jesus  wiien  the  time  came.  But  he  may  have  spoken 
after  the  rupture  took  place,  or  he  may  have  been  warned 
b}'  an  increase  of  suffering.  A  difficulty  here  is  met  in 
the  words  of  the  Psalmist,  Ps.  16:  10  in  connection  with 
St.  Peter's  assertion  in  Acts  2  :  31  ;  "Neither  his  flesh 
did  see  corruption."  Does  the  separation  of  the  blood 
imply  this?  Meyer  says  John  intends  to  describe  it  as 
miraculous.  But  compare  the  exegesis  above.  This 
view  an  elevated  one.  But  it  subjects  phj'sical  to  moral 
causes.  If  Christ's  life  was  subject  to  physical  causes, 
so  by  analogy  should  be  his  death.  It  is  impossible  to 
decide  absolutely.  Comp.  Baur,  Strauss,  Hanna,  An- 
drews, Sir  J.  Simpson  and  Pseudo-John, 

The  Burial.  The  history  of  the  burial,  shows  a  series 
of  providences  to  adduce  witnesses  to  the  identity  of  the 
body  in  the  interval  before  Resurrection. 

He  was  laid  in  a  new  tomb.  Joseph  of  Arimathea 
asks  for  the  body.  John  alone  mentions  Nicodemus  as 
taking  part,  as  he  alone  mentions  him  before.  "  It  was 
in  the  power  of  governors  of  provinces  to  grant  private 
burial  to  criminals  at  the  request  of  friends;  and  it  was 
usuall}'  done,  except  they  were  mean  or  infamous.  But 
for  Joseph,  Christ  would  probably  have  been  buried  with 


188 

the  malefactors.  J^e  Wette  argues  that  verses  38  and  31 
are  inconsistent.  If  Joseph  came  ij.zTa  xwna  and  o^'vac — 
late  in  afternoon,  a.  how  could  Pilate  be  surprised  that 
he  was  already  dead?  and  h.  how  could  Joseph  go  to 
Pilate  before  the  body  was  taken  down  by  the  soldiers? 
Liicke  says  dprj  means  to  take  away  to  burial.  But  Syn. 
say  Joseph  and  Nicodemus  took  him  down  from  the  cross, 
Lk.  23  :  58.  Mk.  15  :  46.  Friedlieb  says  Joseph  asked 
before  the  Jews — but  Pilate  waited  to  hear  from  the  Cen- 
turion. This  disregards  p.Exa  to.uto..  M.e¥«4; — Jews'  re- 
quest was  first.  Then  the  trouble  is  to  find  time  for 
Joseph  to  act.  But  soldiers  would  wait  till  the  malefac- 
tors' death  before  taking  tliem  down.  Or  Joseph  may 
have  followed  the  Jews  very  quickly.  Very  little  time 
was  necessary.  The  tombs  of  rich  families  were  generally 
in  a  rock,  hewn  with  the  mouth  so  as  to  go  in  horizon- 
tally. By  this  interment  in  the  new  tomb  of  Joseph  of 
Arimaihea  was  brought  about,  not  only  the  fulfillment 
of  prophecy,  but  also  a  proof  of  his  resurrection.  No 
other  had  been  buried  there,  hence,  no  other  could  rise 
from  that  tomb.  As  early  as  Jerome  was  this  fact 
noticed  as  important.  He  compares  it  to  the  pure  womb 
of  the  Virgin  Mary. 

2.  He  was  embalmed.  If  they  had  not  known  he  was 
dead,  they  would  not  have  embalmed  his  body.  "  One 
hundred  pounds  weight,"  extraordinary  quantity' ;  de- 
notes great  honor.  There  is  no  proof  that  the  disciples 
watched  the  tomb.  Great  emphasis  is  laid  on  the  con- 
stancy of  the  women.  The  mother  of  Jesus  is  not  men- 
tioned. The  incident  is  important  in  the  chain  of  testi- 
mony to  the  identity  of  his  body.  A  contradiction  as  to 
the  time  of  buying  spices  is  alleged.  Compare  Lk.  23  : 
56  with  Mk.  16  :  1.  No  real  contradiction.  Some  may 
have  been  brought  at  one  time,  some  at  another,  or  some 
on  both  evenings.  But  it  is  asked  "  If  they  saw  the 
burial  by  Joseph  and  Nicodemus,  why  this  additional 
anointing  ?"  John  19  :  40  shows  that  Joseph's  was  used. 
Nor  is  it  probable  that  the  women  were  ignorant  of  the 
first  anointing.  No  real  diflficulty.  It  was  a  new  proof 
of  love.  Becoming  that  the  last  sacred  offices  should  be 
performed  by  intimate  friends. 

Strauss  asks  :  "  If  they  knew  the  tomb  was  sealed, 
and  a  w'atch  set,  how  did  they  expect  to  get  in  ?"     Some 


T'Mjz.M^e'^'^-^ 


Ijj    irUiAJ^>^ 


,^ 


-'lyM.^-^l-o-  '  v^ 


.'Ok:/     ^X,yL--'tS^-t^<.-'<?-ji2.  ^  , 


?;^tXW  /c^.^'W^^-^'^  y^-— ^  "^T^-^^^^-^^ 


•(^L-K,^^-V*cy^     /ix^-^yi^   '   -'  f     4 


189 

reply,  "  Ihey  did  not  know."  But  the  body  was  in 
Joseph's  tomb  and  his  property:  to  Oe  watched,  but  not 
kept  by  the  soldiers. 

§158.  The  Watch  at  the  Sepulchre.  Saturday  Nisan  16. 
According  to  Bleek,  Nisan  15.  When  did  priests  apply 
to  Pilate?  On  Friday  evening — which  was  part  of  the 
Sabbath,  or  Saturday  morning?  Either  way  they  break 
the  Sabbath.  But  v;hy  not  Saturday  night  ?  The  words 
force  the  conclusion  that  they  went  on  the  Sabbath. 
But  a  night  has  intervened.  There  is  however  no  break 
in  the  continuity  of  the  witness  for  identity.  The  Jews 
would  not  seal  an  empty  tomb.  They  would  make  sure 
of  that.  The  prediction  was  that  he  would  rise  on  the 
third  day.  So  no  danger  of  his  being  stolen  till  the  3d 
day. 

Did  Pilate  mean  by  his  reply  "  Ye  have  a  watch,"  the 
band  of  Levites  comprising  the  Temple  v\'atch,  or  the 
soldiers  who  crucified  him  ?  Better  to  understand  it  as 
imperative — "  Have  a  watch."  They  take  Roman  sol- 
diers. Meyer  singularly  discards  this  whole  account. 
His  objections  :  1.  That  Christ's  predictions  were  too 
enigmatical  to  be  known  b}'  the  priests.  Even  the  Apos- 
tles did  not  understand  them,  and  the  priests  did  not  get 
them  from  the  disciples  after  his  death,  for  they  were  de- 
pressed and  had  forgotten  the  prediction.  The  priests 
say  "  We  remember,"  The}-  ma>/  have  obtained  it  from 
believers  before  the  crucifixion.  At  any  rate  they  wish 
to  test  the  truth  of  it?  2.  If  the  priests  feared  removal 
of  the  body  it  was  suicidal  to  allow  it  to  remain  in  custod\- 
of  friends.  But  they  did  not  fear  till  they  heard  the 
friends  had  the  body  and  then  took  immediate  precau- 
tions. If  the  body  was  taken  away  Pilate  would  punish 
ti.e  soldiers  in  execution  of  Roman  Law.  But  they 
would  invent  an  improbable  lie.  He  argues  the  greater 
probability  is  against  the  truth  of  the  narrative.  vVhere- 
fore  the  Greek  recension  of  Mt.  But  it  is  found  in  Mt. 
alone,  because  Mt.  wrote  for  Jews. 

This  Sabbath  was  indeed  a  final  day.  Lange  saj's  it 
was  not  the  last  Sabbath  of  the  old  economy  for  that 
continued  till  Pentecost. 

From  the  Resurrection  to  the  Ascension. 

The  length  is  not  given  in  the  Gospels.  They  record 
but  two  Sabbaths  and  a  journey  to  Galilee.     But  in  Acts 


190 

1 :  3,  "  for  fort}'  dajs,  fitTo.  to  Tia^tiv  durbv,''  forty  has 
some  significance.  It  was  practically  tinie  enough  to 
prove  the  resurrection.  Proofs  are  frequent  varied  and 
numerous.  "We  can  trace  a  picture  of  the  subjective 
state  of  the  disciples.  Why  was  the  mode  of  our  Lord's 
communicatiou  so  changed  ?  He  appears  only  at  inter 
vals.  Acts  1 :  3.  Of  course  then  not  still  in  state  of 
humiliation.  Had  there  been  no  change — resurrection 
would  have  been  more  doubted.  Again,  it  may  have 
been  to  change  the  feelings  of  the  discif>les  towards  him. 
Their  faith  and  love  to  him  must  be  made  as  great  as  to 
God,  by  his  total  absence  in  body  and  yet  spiritual  pres- 
ence. Here  they  were  in  different  places  and  yet  all 
present  in  body  with  him  in  each  place.  This  shows  how 
he  is  with  us  now. 

The  nature  of  his  Resurrection  Body?  Three  an- 
swers: I.  Some  argue  with  Rob.  and  Meyer  that  it  was 
the  same  material  body  which  lay  in  the  tomb.  a.  Nature 
of  proofs  of  identity  :  Jesus  said  "  A  spirit  hath  not  flesh 
and  bones  as  ye  see  me  have."  Sho\ys  his  wounds  and 
eats  with  them.  i).  The  ascension  Avas  the  moment 
for  transfoi-mation.  According  to  this,  his  transpor- 
tation through  space,  entering  through  the  closed 
doors,  &c.,  are  specific  miracles.  II.  The  change 
to  a  spiritual  body  occurred  at  Resurrection.  But 
this  contradicts  his  own  words.  Lk.  24  :  39.  III.  An 
intermediate  condition  suited  to  the  period  of  transitions, 
A  material  body  but  endowed  with  new  properties.  We 
are  safe  only  in  holding  to  the  facts  which  are  :  1.  The 
body  was  the  same.  This  was  necessary  to  recognition. 
2.  Some  change  in  appearance  is  shown  by  the  tardy 
recognition.  This  is  partly  accounted  for  by  the  subjec- 
tive state  of  the  disciples,  partly  as  meant  by  him,  for 
Mk.  16  :  12  says,  "  iv  kzsfia  iiopiprj.^'  3.  Either  super- 
naturally  endowed,  or  instrument  of  miraculous  power. 
4.  Not  fully  transformed.  "  Flesh  and  blood  can  not 
inherit  the  kingdom  of  God." 

Harmony.  We  have  four  accounts  from  different 
points  of  view,  none  complete.  It  is  not  a  continuous 
history  of  a  life,  but  a  series  of  disconnected  miraculous 
appearances,  hence  the  difficulty.  Doubtless,  too,  the 
stupendous  character  of  the  events  make  witnesses  con- 
fused.    Again  all  is  not  recorded.     John   20:30.     Acts 


191 

1  :  3.  Conip.  1  Cor.  15.  i\o  contradiction  can  be  estab- 
lished. Means  for  determining  the  exact  order  do  not 
exist  in  the  narrative.  General  traits  are  the  same.  The 
same  prominence  given,  in  all,  to  the  accounts  of  the 
women  and  the  angels.  The  same  messages  are  sent  to 
the  disciples.  The  very  differences  prove  the  simplicit}' 
of  the  witnesses.  So  in  r/eneral  differences.  It  is  re- 
markable that  Mt.  should  narrate  only  the  events  which 
occurred  in  Galilee^,  while  Mk.  and  Lk.  those  in  Ju^ 
imd  Jerus.,  John'  giving  both,  clTr2trBeing  laidin  Jerus. 
and  ch.  21  in  Gal.  Rationalists  ascribe  this  to  mixed 
tradition.  But  it  is  really  a  striking  [)roof  of  the  very 
opposite;  and  can  be  accounted  for  only  by  the  special 
design  of  each.  Mt.  depicts  the  royal  majesty  of  the 
risen  Lord,  contrasted  witli  Jewish  expectations  and  con- 
fines himself  to  Gal.  as  in  his  ministry.  Being  opposed 
to  Judaism,  his  record  is  out  of  Jerus.  Mk.  establishes 
the  fact  of  the  resurrection  by  the  transition  in  the  mind 
of  the  disciples  from  doubt  to  faith,  the  risen  Son  of  God 
working  on  his  church  by  his  power  through  the  ministers 
of  his  word.  Lk.  connects  resurrection  with  the  suffer- 
ings and  the  unity  of  the  two  and  presents  Christ  as  the 
great  High  Piiest — the  Redeemer  of  all  men,  proclaim- 
ing remission  to  all  nations  beginning  at  Jerus.  In 
John  is  shown  the  effect  on  the  inner  circle  of  believ- 
ers— the  relation  of  the  resurrection  to  the  faith  and 
life  of  the  individual. 

Order  of  the  Several   Evangelists. 

MATT.    XXVIII.  MARK   XVI. 

1.  Mary  Mag.  and  the  other   Mary    I.  Two   Marjs  and  Salome    to    the 

to  the  Sepulchre.  Sepulchre. 

2.  Earthquake  and  angel  rolls  away    2.   Stone  already  rolled  away. 

the  stone.  3.   Angel  sitting  within. 

3.  Angel  seated  on  the  stone.  4.   Message   to  disciples   and  Peter 

4.  Message  to  the  disciples  to  go  to  to  go  to  Galilee. 

Galilee.  o.   They  flee  and  tell  no  man. 

5.  As  women  go,  Jesus  meets  them    K.   Appears  to  Mary   Mag.   and  she 

and  sends  message  to  disciples  tells  others. 

to   go   to    Galilee.     Watch    re-  7.   After,  in  another  form,  to  two  in 

turn  to  the  city.  country. 

6.  The    eleven    in    Galilee.       The  8.   To  the  eleven  at  supper.     Great 

Great  Commisson.     No   ascen-  Commission. 

sion.  9.  After  speaking,  ascended. 


192 

LUKE  XXIV.  JOHN   XX.,  XXI. 

1.  Women    (Mary    and    others)     to  1.    Mary  Magdalene  comes. 

Sepulchere.  "2.  Stone  removed  already. 

'1.  Stone  rolled  away.  3.   Returns  to  tell  Peter  and  John. 

8.  Two  angels  standing  within.  4.    Peter  and  John  come  and  return. 

4.  Refers  to  predictions  in   Galilee.  5.    Mary  remains  and  sees  two  angels 

5.  They  return  and  tell  the  I'est.  within. 

6.  Peter  views  the  Sepulchre.  6.   Sees  Jesus  and  tells  the  rest. 

7.  Appears  to  two  going  to  Pjmmaus.  7.   Same  evening,  Jesus  appears   to 

8.  They  tell  the   eleven,  and  Jesus  the  eleven. 

appears.  8.   Next   week   to   the    eleven    and 

9.  Commission,  tells  them   to  tarry  Thomas. 

in  Jerus.     Goes  out  to  Bethany    '.•.   Galilee.     Draught  of  fishes,   Ch. 
and  ascends.  '  XXI.     Third   time  to  the   dis- 

ciples.    No  ascension. 
1  Cor.  XV.  5.     To  Peter.      XV.   (J,  to  500  in  Galilee.       XV.  7      To 
James,    then  to  all  the  apostles.     Acts  i.  3-8.     To  all  the   apostles  and 
commission  and  ascension. 

Resulting  Difficulties:  1.  The  time  ot  the  visit  ot" 
the  women.  Mt.  says  "  at  the  end  of  the  iSabbath." 
Hence,  it  is  argued  it  was  at  sunset.  But  rather,  early 
in  the  morning.  All  say  very  early.  Mk.  says  how- 
ever the  sun  was  risen,  or  else  Mk.  contradicts  himself. 
Or  we  may  say  one  account  may  date  from  the  time  of 
starting  and  the  other  from  arrival. 

2.  Mt.  and  and  Joliii  do  not  give  the  ol)ject  of  their 
going;  but  this  is  manifest.  Mk.  and  Lk.  distinctly 
say  to  anoint  his  body. 

3.  Mt.  seems  to  imply  that  they  saw  the  earthquake 
and  the  stone  rolled  away.  Rob.  suggests  a  pluperfect 
sense.  This  is  impossible.  Aorists,  however,  are  in- 
definite. He  don't  say  it  then  occurred.  Some  under- 
stand the  earthquake  figuratively.  The  mere  mention 
of  this  is  its  refutation.  The  fathers  say  Christ  left  the 
tomb  before  the  stone  was  rolled  away — as  he  needed  no 
help  to  rise.  Henry  says,  Angels  aided  him  as  token  of 
their  loyalty.  Remark,  they  shall  assist  in  the  general 
resurrection.  The  act  of  resurrection  was  seen  by  none. 
0\\\y  frknds  beheld  the  resurrected  Lord.  In  regard  to 
other  difficulties  ;  older  harmonists  took  every  thing  as 
a  different  account  and  so  give  various  companies  of 
women,  &c.  Others  make  but  one  group.  Ebrard  says 
the  main  point  in  all  was  the  appearance  of  Christ  to 
the  XI.  Before,  all  was  prefatory.  He  gives  as  illustra- 
tion :  "A  friend  of  mine  is  at  the  point  of  death.  I 
am  just  returning  from  a  journey.     On   n>y  way  I  am 


f 


..^ 


193 

met  in  succession  by  difterent  friends  :  One  tells  me  of 
his  illness,  two  others  inform  me  of  his  death,  a  fourth 
gives  me  a  ring  which  he  has  bequeathed  to  me.  I 
hasten  to  the  house  and  find  a  mournful  scene.  On  my 
return  I  write  to  an  acquaintance,  and  with  the  scene 
at  the  liouse  most  vivid  in  my  mind,  I  write  briefly  of 
the  rest,  that  on  my  way  home  I  met  four  friends  who 
told  me  of  his  death  and  gave  a  ring.  Of  what  import- 
ance to  the  reader,  whether  all  came  together,  or  suc- 
cessively, or  which  brought  the  ring?"  D""''^ 

4.  While  John  speaks  of  Mary  Mag.  alone,  Syn. 
represent  others.  Mt.,  Mary  Mag.  and  another  Mary, 
Mk.  adds  Salome.  Lk.  mentions  two  Marys,  Joanna 
and  others,  a.  Ebrard  takes  John  as  fact.  But  Syn. 
group  her  visit  with  others,  h.  Lange,  Westcott,  Ores, 
and  others  separate  Lk.  and  suppose  two  companies. 
One  led  by  Mary  Mag.,  the  other  by  Joanna.  This  ia 
improbable,  as  Lk.  mentions  Mary  Mag.  himself,  and 
leaves  the  difficulty  with  John.  More  probably  Lk.  is 
with  the  other  Syn.  c.  Lightfoot,  Rob.,  &c.,  say  all 
came  together  and  Joiin  specifies  Mary  Mag.  to  tell  in- 
dividual faith. 

5.  How  many  visions  of  angels?  Syn.  record  as  if 
the  women  at  first  saw  the  angels.  John  as  if  they  ap- 
peared to  Mary  Mag.  on  the  second  coming.  Clearly 
two  appearances  of  angels.  John  confines  his  narrative 
to  Mary  Mag.  who  ran  back  to  the  disciples  before  act- 
ually reaching  the  sepulchre.  Lightfoot  combines  them 
all  into  one.  Those  who  have  two  companies  make 
three  visions. 

6.  Number  of  angels.  Mt.gives  one  sitting  outside. 
Mk.  one  inside.  Some  say  the  stone  was  rolled  inward 
so  Mt.  agrees  with  the  others.  Some  say  it  was  in  the 
vestibule.  Some,  there  were  two  angels.  Either  they 
did  not  see  the  angels  till  they  were  inside,  or  the  angels 
moved.  Lk.  says  "  they  stood  "  which  may  mean  as  some 
render  "  appeared  suddenly."  John  says  Mar^^  Mag.  saw 
two  angels.  This  is  a  distinct  vision.  So  Lk.  also  gives 
two.  If  two  companies  there  is  no  question  ;  if  one  — 
there  is  no  contradiction..  The  explanation  seems  to  be  : 
There  was  one  main  fact — a  vision  of  angels — more  ac- 
curately, of  two  angels. 


194 

7.  Message  of  angels.  In  Mt.  and  Mk.  the  angel 
tells  them  to  meet  Jesus  in  Gal.  This  is  natural,  as 
Mt's  narrative  is  Galilean.  Lk,  reminds  them  of  his 
words  in  Gal.  John  records  the  message  as  given  by 
Jesus  himself,  to  Mary  Mag.  Here  those  who  make 
two  companies  have  no  difficulties,  nor  those  of  one 
company  either,  as  each  tells  what  his  plan  demands. 
Each  account  calls  to  mind  an  empty  sepulchre  as  the 
first  witness.  The  angels  point  to  it,  and  this  accounts 
for  Mary  Mag.'s  haste  at  her  first  visit.  The  angels 
first  announce  the  fact  "  The  Lord  is  risen  "  as  a  report 
from  heaven.  That  the  angels  appear  and  disappear  in 
a.  remarkable  manner  is  insisted  on  by  those  who  make 
these  mere  visions,  and  hence  all  dependent  on  the  sub- 
jective state  of  the  witnesses.  If  so  how  is  it  that  the 
keepers  see  the  angels?  This  is  to  prove  that  the  stone 
was  not  moved  by  the  earthquake.  The  disciples  do  not 
see  them,  because  their  faith  is  to  be  tried  before  they 
can  be  constituted  eye  witnesses  of  the  truth  to  the 
church.  They  must  themselves  experience  difficulties 
of  faith  in  what  seemed  to  them  disputable.  The  whole 
question  of  vision  of  angels  admits  of  a  very  easy  ex- 
planation on  the  ground  of  simple  natural  variety  of  ac- 
counts. Lessing  says  :  "  Do  you  not  see  that  the  Evan- 
gelists do  not  count  the  angels  ?  There  were  millions 
of  angels  around  the  tomb."  Lange  :  "  These  harmon- 
ies are  in  the  form  of  a  four-voiced  narrative,  and  indi- 
cate an  agitated  state  of  the  Evangelists." 

8.  Did  Christ  appear  to  Mary  Mag.  alone  or  to  more  ? 
Sceptics  argue  much  from  the  ease  with  which  women 
are  deceived.  The  great  fact  of  the  Resurrection  of 
Christ  was  to  rest  on  testimony  ;  so  it  is  first  to  come  to 
the  disciples  in  that  form,  to  subject  them  to  trial  and 
discipline  them.  This  is  prominent  throughout.  Angels 
bear  witness  to  the  women — they  to  the  Apostles — they 
to  the  world.  Mt.  makes  two  Marys  meet  Jesus,  in 
company  with  all  the  women.  But  John  says  Jesus  met 
Mary  Mag.  alone  on  her  return  to  the  city.  Mk.  says 
"  He  appeared  first  to  Mary  Mag."  There  are  three  ex- 
planations :  1.  Lightfoot,  &c.,  make  but  one  appearance 
and  that  to  Mary  Mag.  alone.  Mt.  generalizes.  The 
appearance  was  to  Mary  but  he  says  "  to  the  women." 
2.    Lange,  Gres.,   two   appearances,  the   first  to  Mary  : 


195 

Strauss  objects  on  ground  of  time.  He  sa^'s  "  Where 
are  the  women  all  this  time?"  Do  they,  as  some  say, 
linger  near  the  tomb,  or  do  they  go  back  to  the  city,  or 
is  it  as  Gres.  supposes,  a  week  before  Christ  appears  to 
the  other  women  ?  Most  of  us  are  content  to  pay  we  are 
responsible  only  for  the  succession  of  events  and  don't 
care  what  the  women  were  doing.  Rob.  says  there  were 
two  appearances,  but  the  lirst  was  to  the  women.  Mk's 
statement  that  Mary  was  first  is  but  relative — i.  e.,  the 
first  of  the  three  recorded  by  him.  But  Mk.  is  too 
emphatic  to  admit  of  any  such  explanation. 

9.  According  to  Mt.,  Lk.  and  John,  the  women  go  im- 
mediatel}-  in  jo\'  to  the  Apostles.  Mk.  says  d'josuc  ouoku 
IcTiov.  Admission  into  two  companies  is  artificial.  Mk's 
obvious  meaning  is  they  did  not  stop  to  tell  every  body 
they  met. 

§  168.  Marij  Magdalene  summons  Peter  and  John. 
While  the  women  are  with  the  aiigels,  Mary  Mag.  has 
gone  to  call  John  and  Peter.  There  is  a  significance  in 
their  being  together  and  Mary's  going  to  them.  "  The 
youngei-  reaches  the  tomb  first  "  savs  Harte.  Peter  im- 
pulsive is  the  first  to  rush  in.  There  they  find  the  linen 
clothes  lying.  Not  carried  away  at  if  the  body  had  been 
stolen,  or  as  if  the  death  of  Christ  were  an  imposition 
and  he  had  escaped  :  but  neatly  folded,  and  laid  away, 
indicative  of  tr;inquillity.  John  "saw  and  believed  " — 
what?  that  the  tomb  was  empty?  No!  but  in  the  full 
significance  of  the  scene.  Lk.  makes  Peter  stoop. 
John  very  vividU'  describes  himself  as  stooping  and 
looking  in. 

§  164.  Jesus  appears  to  3Iart/  Magdalene.  Mary  is  con- 
spicuous as  of  a  most  loving  spirit.  She  is  standing 
weeping — and  does  not  share  the  faith  of  John — and  a 
man  appears.  She  does  not  at  once  recognize  him. 
This  indicates  a  change  in  external  appearance  or  Mary 
would  have  known  him.  It  also  confirms  the  reality 
of  the  resurrectioii.  If  it  were  a  mere  subjective  vision, 
she  would  have  thought  it  to  be  Christ  at  first.  This  and 
the  walk  to  Eramaus  are  fatal  to  the  visionary  theory. 
N-otice  the  peculiar  inconsistence  oi'  Strauss.  He  says 
"  A  myth  originating  in  Gal.  some  time  after  Christ's 
death.  It  grew  out  of  a  growing  reverence  for  Christ 
and  a  study  of  Messianic  prophecies."     But  how  does  it 


196 

suit  Dr.  Strauss  to  account  for  Mary's  seeing  Christ 
here?  Her  idea  cannot  be  accounted  tor  on  this  theory, 
for  she  had  no  thought  of  the  resurrection  and  Strauss 
says  Christ  had  never  predicted  it  I 
/  "  Touch  me  not."  The  rebuke  is  to  Mary's  mistake. 
She  supposed  that  ordinary  intercourse  was  to  be  re- 
newed. Jesus  warns  her  that  it  is  not  to  be  so.  He 
virtually  says,  "  ISTo  longer  is  sense,  but  faith,  to  be  the 
mode  of  communion."  So  when  he  said  to  the  eleven 
and  Thomas,  "Handle  me,"  there  is  no  inconsistency, 
as  then  he  wished  to  convince  them  of  his  bodily  iden- 
tity.    Mary  is  here  already  convinced  of  that. 

§162.  Jesus  meets  the  icorpen.  Mt.  says  Jesus  met  the 
women  and  gave  them  the  message;  how  can  we  recon- 
cile that  with  this?  Some  argue  that  they  are  the  same 
occurrence.  But  it  is  better  to  regard  them  as  different. 
Three  Evangelists  distinctly  state  that  the  Apostles  did 
not  believe  the  report  of  the  women.  This  is  natural. 
It  doubtless  sounded  strange  to  them  that  the  women 
alone  saw  what  Peter  and  John  did  not  see.  They  were 
in  a  state  of  fear  and  excitement. 

§165.  7he  Report  of  the  Watch.  Reported  by  Mt. 
only  as  he  alone  gave  the  account  of  its  being  set.  The 
otter  of  bribes  to  the  soldiers.  The  story  is  incredible 
on  the  face  of  it.  It  was  impossible  for  the  disciples  to 
steal  the  body.  Grotius  collects  evidence  of  its  cur- 
rency among  the  Jews  in  the  2nd  and  3d  centui'ies,  and 
says  it  was  still  believed  by  them  !  Strauss  objects  : 
"  Is  it  likely  that  the  whole  Sanhedrim  at  a  regular  meet- 
ing would  unite  in  givitig  otticial  sanction  to  a  lie  ?" 
Ebrard  replies  :  "  Is  it  likely  that  the  whole  Sanhedrim 
at  a  regular  meeting  would  unite  in  a  judicial  murder  ? 
— The  marvel  is  what  pious,  conscientious  men  the  San. 
become  in  the  hands  of  Dr.  Strauss.  The  whole  of 
Christendom,  a  multitude  of  humble,  quiet  men,  may 
have  devised  and  adhered  tenaciouslv  to  a  bare-faced 
lie  ;  but  the  murderers  of  Jesus  were  incapable  of  per- 
suading these  soldiers  to  propagate  a  trifling  untruth, 
which  their  own  conduct  had  rendered  necessary  I" 
The  priests  believed  the  resurrection,  as  they  knew  of 
the  empty  tomb,  not  with  a  full  faith,  but  as  they  had 
already  witnessed  many  miracles.  Their  consciences 
w^ere  uneasy.     The  Apostles  do  not  refer  to  this  because 


) 


197 

they  had  better  proofs,  and  this  lie  was  not  current  in 
the  places  to  which  they  were  sent.  Why  not  mentioned 
in  Acts  4  ?  Because  the  Sanhedrim  did  not  deu}'  the 
resurrection  in  their  earlier  persecutions, 

§  166.  Jesus  seen  of  Peter.  The  ten  go  to  Emmaus. 
The  third  appearance,  and  first  to  an  Apostle,  was  to 
Peter  after  the  two  went  to  Emmaus  :  Lk.  24:  34:  I 
Cor.  15  :  5.  An  honor  to  Peter  considering  his  denial,- 
and  intended  as  a  help  to  his  repentance.  The  walk  to 
Emmaus  shows  the  feeling  of  the  disciples.  The  mis- 
take of  these  men  and  their  non  recognition  are  incom- 
patible with  the  visionary  theory.  Who  were  the  two  ? 
Wies.,  &c.,  understand  Cleopas  to  be  Alphaeus  (Mt.  10:3), 
and  the  other,  the  Apostle  James  his  son.  This  is  not 
probable.  Lightfoot  thinks  the  second  person  was  Peter. 
Some,  that  he  was  Luke.  Discrepancy  :  Mk.  says  their 
report  is  not  believed  ;  Lk.  that  the  eleven  anticipated 
them  with  "  The  Lord  is  risen  indeed  and  hath  appeared 
unto  Simon."  Therefore  they  did  believe.  The  ques- 
tion of  Harmony  is  interesting,  as  on  it  turns  the  point, 
whether  the  Apostles  believed  at  all  on  testimony,  or 
remained  unbelieving  till  they  saw  for  themselves.  The 
margin  of  the  E.  V.  makes  Mk.'s  statement  a  question, 
which  has  little  foundation.  Some  say  they  believed 
Peter,  but  could  not  believe  the  two  from  Emmaus,  as 
it  was  a  seeming  contradiction  that  Christ  should  be  seen 
l»y  both.  It  this  is  a  true  solution  it  remains  that  all  but 
Peter  (and  Thomas)  believed  upon  testimony.  The  two 
goin^  to  Emmaus  betray  a  dim  idea  that  the  third  day 
should  bring  some  change  and  yet  it  was  almost  ended. 
The  breaking  of  bread  probably  not  Lord's  Supper. 
The  instructions  of  .lepus  to  the  two  agree  with  Lk's  re-  ^ 

port  of  the  words  of  the  angels.  ^  n\  vk 

§  167.    Jesus  appears  to  the  Apostles.      Thomas  absent.       ^    '^J\^' 
Sunday  evening.     Most  important  and   perhaps  most  de-  t'SLy\r^  p^ 
cisive  for  then  were  their  doubts  tinally  overcome,  andcy  ^A  ^ 
they  are  appointed  witnesses  for  the  future.     Given  b}'     vJ 
Mk.,  Lk.,  John,  Paul.     Mk.   and   Lk.  close  their  narra- 
tive here,  as  the  last  essential  thing.     Mk.  introduces  a 
third  appearance  ;    Lk.  shows  his  bodily  presence, — the 
nature   of  his   resurrection    body   and  the  scars  of   his 
crucifixion.     The   question  now  was   not  the  fact  of  his 
resurrection  but   the   reality   and  identit}'   of  his  body. 


198 

They  were  at  their  evening  meal,  perhaps  in  the  room 
where  they  kept  the  passover.  Coming  through  closed 
doors— Lutherans  say  it  shows  the  ubiquity  of  Christ's 
person.  The  point  of  the  visit  was  to  show  that  he  was 
not  a  spirit.  He  declares  his  body  to  be  "  flesh  and 
bones."  Handling  him  was  an  important  evidence  (1 
John  1 :  1).  Lk.  adds  a  crowning  evidence  in  Christ's 
eating.  It  is  commonly  accepted  that  it  was  not  for 
nourishment,  but  as  evidence  of  his  material  body. 
The  identity  of  his  body  could  not  be  better  proved. 

The  Apostolic  Commission  is  now  given,  which  shows 
the  spiritual  import  of  the  resurrection.  It  was  because 
they  were  personally  convinced  that  they  are  made  wit- 
nesses. Paul  (1  Cor.  15:  5)  speaks  of  Twelve  Syn. 
give  eleven.  Clear  and  important  that  other  Christians 
were  present  as  iw.drfcat.  The  two  from  Emmaus  were 
plainly  present.  Tlius  the  powers  here  conferred  were 
not  contined  to  ai)Ostles  alone.  .Was  the  commissioD 
given  to-night?  Mk.  and  Lk.  add  it  here  as  the  last 
thing.  Van  Cos.  puts  it  after  v.  44.  John  leaves  no 
doubt  that  the  commission  was  given  here.  So  it  was 
twice  given.  The  commission  to  witness,  preach  and 
administer  discipline  was  based  on  the  gift  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  as  authority.  John  says  he  breathed  on  them, 
and  saith  "  Receive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost."  This  was  in 
consequence  of  the  resurrection.  It  was  not  however 
plenary,  but  partial  and  preparatory,  corresponding  to 
their  wants  till  Pentecost.  There  was  need  of  it;  they 
were  passing  through  a  critical  period,  A  transition 
from  doubt  to  faith.  They  had  still  to  gather  and  guide 
the  body  of  disciples  till*  Pentecost.  (N.  B.  The  dis- 
tinction between  nveuiw.  djcov  here  and  to  Tivvjfw.  dycov  in 
Acts  is  untenable).  Strauss  says  the  command  to  tarry 
at  Jerus.  (in  Lk.)  contradicts  the  command  to  go  to  Gal. 
Van  Oos.  and  Alf.  say  this  command  was  not  given  till 
after  the  return  from  Gal,  But  there  is  no  inconsistency. 
One  qualifies  the  other.  The  "  tarry  "  qualifies  the 
Commission.  Make  Jerus.  your  headquarters,  and  do 
not  go  to  preach  till  after  Pentecost. 

§  168.  Jesus  appears  to  the  Twelve.  Thomas  present. 
Time  2d  Sabbath.  John  alone  records  it.  1.  How  came 
the  apostles  still  in  Jerusalem  ?  a.  They  would  not  travel 
during  the  feast,    which    lasted    till    Friday,     b.    Some 


•\'. 


V 


■l\\    V 


Ar  .r 


V;;  \ '  J 


■V) 


n'ty 


T    r 


t^^^^>t-l^ 


'L-nyu. 


Ulhi. 


/OLAy 


199 

think  unbelief  ivept  them.  Thomas  and  others  stiil 
doubted,  e.  Others  suppose  the  command  to  go  was  ac- 
companied by  an  intimation  as  to  when  and  how.  2. 
Why  together  on  the  iirst  day  of  the  wpek  ?  To  com- 
memorate the  resurrection  ?  Certainly  it  is  the  begin- 
ning of  the  Christian  Sabbath.  They  meet  Christ  on 
tliese  days  only.  The  force  of  their  example  issanctioned 
by  Christ.  What  was  Thomas's  reception  ?  Jesus  com- 
mends Thomas  for  faith,  but  shows  there  is  a  higher 
faith  bpsed  on  spiritual  evidences  and  shows  the  danger 
of  subjecting  faith  to  sense  or  reason.  Thomas  is  con- 
vinced before  putting  his  test  to  practice,  and  joyfully 
believes. 

An  important  point :  that   the   claim   of  Divinity  is 

variouslj'  made  elsewhere,  but  here  only  in  the  Gospels       ,       ,   [ 

is  d^o:;  a|iip|ied_  to_Christ  by  the  disciples  or  accepted  by   ^ctA/K^-*-^ 
h\m.-     The   Gospel  of  John    begins  :     "  The  word  was 
God  "  and  closes  with  "  My  Lord  and  My  God  !" 

§  169.  Jesus  appears  to  seven  Apostles  on  the  sea  of 
7'iherias.  By  most  harmonists  put  before  Mt.'s  narrative 
because  of  Jno.  21  :  14.  The  charge  of  Meyer  that 
Paul's  statement  (I.  Cor.  15  :  5-7),  cannot  be  reconciled 
is  not  sustained.  One  explanation  is  that  Paul  includes 
under  the  expression  "  seen  of  the  twelve,"  the  three  of 
John  ;  or  it  may  be  that  Paul  summarizes.  The  tirst 
appearance  would  be  at  the  grave,  then  at  Jerus.  in 
vicinity  of  the  ton'b.  But  it  must  not  be  confined  to 
Jerus.  as  the  witness  is  to  extend  to  hundreds  of  be- 
lievers in  Gal.  It  is  also  to  show  the  bodily  relations  of 
Jesus;  he  was  superhuman  as  to  extension.  Again,  by 
this  he  corrects  the  mistaken  idea  of  the  disciples,  that 
the  new  Dispensation  should  be  also  a  Theocracy  iu 
Jerus.  Comp.  Acts  1.  Disciples  had  gone  to  Gal.  and 
returned  to  their  daily  occupation.  Early  in  the  morn- 
ing Christ  appears  on  the  shore  and  repeats  the  miracle 
that  had  called  them  at  first  — thus  reinstating  them.  A 
promise  of  great  success  in  their  work  is  seen  in  the 
number  of  fishes  taken.  There  is  no  evidence  that  the 
fire  and  the  bread  were  miraculous.  They  were  signifi- 
cant of  rest  after  toil.  The  results  of  toil  give  joy. 
Peter  is  especially  reinstated.  The  three-fold  question 
refers  to  the  denials  :  "  Simon,  Sou  of  Jonas!"  alludes 
to  his  original  nature,  reminding  him  of  his  unrenewed 


200  , 

state.  I^otice  the  comparison  "  more  than  these  "  based 
on  "  though  all  should  forsake  thee,  yet  will  not  I." 
Peter's  humility  appears  in  his  not  usingthe  comparison. 
Peter  asserts  but  the  humbler  personal  love,  (fcleto  ;  Jesus 
used  the  higher,  ayanaoj.  but  at  last  descends  to  use  even 
ifdzco.  Notice  also  {a)  lambs,  [b)  sheep,  (c)  little  sheep. 
Also  Ttociiacvs-cv  and  j^oaxeiu.  The  martyrdom  of  Peter  is 
added  to  show  his  confidence  in  Peter's  constancy. 
When  this  book  was  written  Peter  had  been  long  dead 
and  there  is  a  reference  to  John's  life  and  exemption 
from  martyrdom.  Upon  Jno.  21  :  24  is  based  a  strong 
argument  for  the  authorship  of  the  book. 

§  170.  Jesus  meets  the  Apostles  and  500  ow  a  mount  in  Gal. 
Paul,  I.  Cor.  15  :  6.  This  is  the  same  as  Mt.'s  eleven. 
It  involves  the  question  whether  the  commission  was 
given  to  the  whole  church  or  not.  Not  so,  unless  others 
besides  the  eleven  were  present.  The  chief  evidence  is 
from  Mt.  himself:  1.  Why  appoint  a  meeting  on  a 
mount  in  Gal.  for  eleven  only  ?  2.  Mt.  says  some  wor- 
shipped but  some  doubted  like  Thomas.  3.  Mt.  28  :  7 
says  "  there  shall  ye  see  him"  in  the  message  to  the 
women.  4.  There  is  reason  why  Mt.  should  emphasize 
the  eleven,  as  to  him  the  ecclesiastical  commission  was 
the  prominent  thing.  jSotice,  they  wont  where  they 
were  commanded,  hence  had  an  interesting  meeting.  A 
fortuitous  gathering  is  inconceivable.  A  general  sum- 
mons was  necessary.  The  2l8t  of  John  gives  us  the 
probable  occasion  of  the  command.  Compare  the  second 
or  great  commission  in  Mt.  with  John.  1.  This  (Mt.'s) 
makes  no  mention  of  suffering  or  of  the  reality  of  his 
resurrection  body.  2.  It  is  fuller  than  the  previous  one. 
3.  Sets  forth  the  completed  authority  of  Christ  as  its 
basis.  In  Acts  we  have  only  the  stor}'  of  this  work. 
This  Commission  is  the  basis  of  the  Christian  sacrament 
of  Baptism. 

§  171.  Our  Lord  is  seen  of  James,  then  of  all  (he  Apostles. 
Which  James?  More  likely  James  of  Jerus.  than  the 
son  of  Zebedee,  but  it  cannot  be  determined.  Luke  in 
Acts  implies  manifestations  which  are  not  recorded. 
Several  facts  are  gathered  from  Acts  1,  e.  g.  that  Christ's 
mother  and  brethren  accompanied  him  to  Gal.  Addi- 
tional evidences  of  continued  false  expectations  on  part 
of  the  Apostles.     Again  they  are  to   tarry  in   Jerus.  till 


,^ 


^ 'd/^e^yuh/iA^^-rU 


201 

they  be  "  baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost  not  many  days 
hence."  Also  the  order  of  the  conversioi^  of  the  world 
is  given  :  "  In  Jems,  and  in  all  Jadea,  and  in  Samaria 
and  even  to  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth."  From 
the  climactic  advance  in  the  proofs  of  the  resurrection, 
we  find  a  final  argument  against  the  subjective  visionary 
theory.  No  such  thing  could  have  arisen  from  merely 
accidental  visions  to  difierent  persons, 

§172.  7'he  Ascension.  At  the  end  of  the  40  days  onr 
Lord  once  more  appears.  It  is  at  Jems.  He  ascends  in 
sight  of  the  disciples.  This  is  the  proper  conclusion  of 
the  record.  The  Ascension  is  necessarily  associated  with 
the  resurrection  for  there  could  be  no  more  dfuth  to 
Christ.  He  must  ascend,  and  in  presence  of  the  dis- 
ciples. They  had  seen  him  appear  and  disappear  for  40 
days.  If  this  then  was  no  more  formal  than  those,  they 
would  be  continually  looking  for  him  to  return.  Even 
as  it  was  they  expected  him  to  come  again  in  their  own 
day.  Also  gives  a  definiteness  and  location  to  our  ideas 
of  a  risen  Lord  and  a  Christian  heaven.  We  cannot 
now  enter  into  the  difiiculties  suggested  by  the  Lutherans 
and  others.  Concerning  the  sacraments—  local  limita- 
tion, &c.,  can  only  touch  on  critical  objections.  I'ljice  of 
the  Ascension  :  An  apparent  contradiction  :  Bethany 
(Lk.),  Mount  of  Olives  (Acts).  But  they  are  so  near  to 
each  other  that  there  is  no  real  difficulty.  Was  it  visible 
to  others  than  disciples?  Hard  to  conceive  that  it  was. 
John  and  Mt.  don't  mention  the  ascension  at  all.  Only 
Mk.  and  Lk.  tell  of  it,  and  Tisch.  rejects  avt(pe(JS.To  from 
Lk.  Then  Acts  is  our  only  authority  for  a  visible  ascen- 
sion. But  Tisch.  is  not  followed  by  most  critics  At 
an}-  rate,  it  is  in  Acts  which  is  by  Lk.  Mk.  and  Lk. 
had  a  special  object  in  recording  it.  Both  show  Christ 
as  the  Savior  of  the  world  and  look  to  the  future  history 
of  the  church.  And  though  Mt.  and  John. omit  it,  yet 
they  refer  lo  it  in  the  Gospel.  The  going  away  is  not 
the  final  point,  for  he  is  to  come  again. 

Mk.  seems  to  connect  the  ascension  immediately  with 
the  first  interview  with  the  eleven  on  the  resurrection 
Sunday.  Lk.  seems  to  imply  the  same  thing.  It  is  after 
the  report  of  the  two  from  Emmaus.  (Though  in  Acts 
it  is  "  after  40  days)."  Upon  this  is  based  the  theory  of 
repeated   ascensions.     Baur  says  Evangelists  teach    that 


202 

Christ's  abode  after  the  resurrection  was  in  heaven.  So 
some  Harmonists.  The  sceptics  sa}'  there  were  two  tra- 
ditions of  his  Ascension.  One  on  the  first  Sunday — and 
another  (Galilean)  after  an  interval  of  40  days.  But 
notice,  the  difficulty  cannot  be  so  great,  or  Lk.  is  at  dis- 
cord with  himself  He  records  it  in  both  forms  ;  and  a 
sufficient  explanation  is  found  in  the  intention  of  the 
two  passages.  The  mode  of  ascension  was  exquisitely 
appropriate.  His  speaking  with  them  — blessing  them, 
and  then  rising  from  them  till  a  cloud  enfolds  him,  con- 
cealing him  from  their  sight.  The  words  of  the  angels, 
also,  to  the  gazing  disciples,  sanction  the  church's  atti- 
tude of  expectation.  And  he  said  that  true  waiting  is 
to  work  as  well  as  to  wait. 


/■  ^  1 


f''. 


(P  cf^^n  *>' 


4 


\ 


^y^'^' 


\^- 


^o^^- 


